Even though different Linux distros are often fairly close in terms of real-life performance and all of them have a clear advantage over Windows in many use cases, we can’t reject the fact that Arch Linux has undoubtedly won the competition. And now I’m so glad to have another reason to proudly say “I use Arch btw”

::: It was a joke of course :::

  • TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    Jesus

    Installation size:

    Fedora  - 7.7 GB

    Arch (actually EndeavourOS) - 45 GB

    Ubuntu - 49.2 GB

    Windows - 72 GB

    How the hell is Fedora so small? That’s insane.

    • lazynooblet@lazysoci.al
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      What are these sizes from? All my Linux installs start with <20G root disks and end up with some spare.

      And Windows at 72G? Whilst it’s more than Linux it’s not that much.

      • Spiralvortexisalie@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        I think the videomaker may be failing to account for swap space. The latest Fedora releases use zram (swap that lives in memory instead of hard disk) by default, while the rest do not. Windows in particular does not take 72G and tends to be aggressive in swap allocation. The fact that he presents this data as “free space available” adds confusions while seemingly burying the simplest answer.

        • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          “Swap space that lives in RAM” No… just … no. Swap is for when RAM runs out/low. It literally cannot live in RAM…

              • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                9 months ago

                Zram is swap in ram. It uses fast compression to quickly compress memory instead of moving it to disk.

                • teawrecks@sopuli.xyz
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  9 months ago

                  The disagreement here might be a semantic one. When people say “swap” they’re usually referring to the swap partition on disk, not just any memory that can be used to “spill” to.

                  What you are describing with zram serves a fundamentally different function from swap space. If the OS dumps its memory to swap, the PC can lose power and still recover. If it compresses LRU memory to zram, and loses power, it cannot recover.

                  Both are useful in low memory situations, but swap covers more than that. Most familiar with swap space would agree that its location on a nonvolatile disk rather than in volatile memory is critical to what makes it “swap” space.