On Fri, 2004-01-23 at 10:58, Carl Cerecke wrote: > Michael JasonSmith wrote: > > > > I have heard a lot of good things about machines having better > > interactive performance under 2.6, so it is probably worth a shot as it > > would be cheaper than the other options. > > It would? I think it has the potential to be more expensive - futzing > around with settings and whatnot. Could take all day if it goes badly. > That's more expensive than a $150 HD. Mind you, things still could go > wrong with that - copying the filesystems might take a while too. > > Of course, if you're a postgrad student doing, say, a PhD. Time's cheap. > Ay, Michael? I was factoring in your time, actually. [We pause to let Michael roll his eyes in a condescending manner.]
Changing a MoBo or HDD can cause problems, and assuming that you will eventually be changing to 2.6 *anyway* I guessed that the $150 + time for a new HDD would be less more the time taken to get 2.6 going --- especially if you used a pre-packaged kernel. Anyway, if you do not want my help, I will go back to reading some articles\ldots -- Michael JasonSmith http://www.ldots.org/
