I understand. At least that should put an end to your accusation of whining.
Tony
On 04/21/2016 10:03 AM, James Cameron wrote:
I don't have the network resources to prepare and upload images on
speculation.
On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 09:58:31AM +0800, Tony Anderson wrote:
James
If you have an image you want tested that can be installed on an SD
card for the XO-1, I'll make the time. Since the XO-1 has an early
version installed,
it should be possible to measure time for various operations. I
probably won't realistically be able to devote time until mid-May.
I generally advise teachers to have the students close the lid
rather than shutdown between lessons. I also show them the frame and
the number of running activities. Many impatient kids will have 10
or more instances running. So restoring the throttle we once had
would be very helpful - possibly more than swap.
The Apple II was very successful in schools - anyone want to compare
its performance with an XO-1? Generally, students at deployments did
not buy the XO and do not have any other computer available. Here in
the Philippines, smartphones and tablet are common. However, in
Rwanda, the Nokia still reigns.
Most importantly, the XO gives the students a chance to learn that
they can make the computer do what they want it to do and not just
accept what they are given.
Tony
On 04/21/2016 06:27 AM, James Cameron wrote:
On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 05:22:21PM -0400, Dave Crossland wrote:
On 20 April 2016 at 16:46, James Cameron <[1]qu...@laptop.org> wrote:
the performance ratio between our low-cost
low-power hardware and the competition was already evident on Fedora
Linux; it didn't need Windows to expose it
Sorry if this is an obvious question, but, can anything done to make
Sugar feel faster on XO-1s today?
Yes, and I've been doing some of that in the past few months. With
13.2.7 you have my latest work, which added swap and removed several
animations.
Adding swap has mostly removed memory pressure. Under memory
pressure, activity startup is roughly doubled, as the CPU spends time
thrashing in the memory management. Disadvantage is higher power cost
and possibly decreased Flash endurance, although the endurance of a
set of heavily used XO-1 has shown no sign of the deterioration
expected by now.
Removing animations has allowed CPU cycles to be better spent on
responsiveness. At one stage we had 50/50 competition between the
activity launch animation and the starting activity. Instrumenting
the frame and transition box animations showed there was enough time
for only one or two intermediate animation states before the final
state; which turned out to the cost of handling the function key
release event. Some of these changes are not in Sugar master yet, but
in an OLPC branch; one such was proposed, but immediately closed with
appeal to process;
https://github.com/sugarlabs/sugar/pull/619
As for what to do next; ideas are welcome, but here's a few;
- profiling, of startup, of interactive response, (i've used xdotool
for interactive response tests),
- upgrade Gtk3, and GObject, to fix the memory leaks,
- record metrics of response, deidentify, aggregate, and report.
Although at this stage the interest in XO-1 should have degraded as
the units have degraded, and any return on investment is doubtful.
Plenty of people left who whinge about XO-1, but ask them to test a
patch or release and no response.
So it's more about people wanting their rainbow pooing unicorns.
Unrealistic expectations, polarised framing, denial, and consequent
unwillingness to be involved.
[...]
_______________________________________________
Sugar-devel mailing list
Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
_______________________________________________
Sugar-devel mailing list
Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
