Why does this peice of shit take 2 minutes to boot while windows only takes 30 seconds?

Is it my DE? I use KDE. My shitty Ubuntu distro?

Attached: 1200px-Tux.svg.png (1200x1414, 259K)

Upgrade your computer

Run
systemd-analyze blame

I'm having problems too with sddm. If I switch to lightdm booting to X is much faster.

Attached: poettering.jpg (1024x678, 90K)

I can't tell if this is bait or not. With Windows I have to wait a good 10 minutes from power on till the desktop is actually usable even on a fresh install because it's still autistically caching small shit to the disk. Windows REQUIRES you use an SSD while Linux will only receive marginal benefits over a mechanical disk. Boot time is the one thing you absolutely can never defend with Windows, and in fact is one of the main reasons I don't use that shit. Also, in case you still want to try and refute this objective fact, I present to you my trap card: runit.

Attached: 1547220816786.png (689x560, 321K)

funny how it's the other way around in my hardware
manjaro cinnamon

do you have any fucking clue what that command does lol, that shit isn't at all relevant

Yeah I'm starting to think its my DE. KDE Plasma is dogshit.

kde is god tier but it's not made for slow computers

yea, we're not talking about poorfags with shit hardware here, sport.
leave the thread.

My 10 year old thinkpad boots in 2 and half seconds, the fuck is wrong with your pc?

Mmmm, I dont use systemd, didnt knew the problem was so bad.

My windows machine would take a good 2 minutes to boot and a bit longer for my computer not to shit on me while opening my user sessions.

Ever since I installed arch my machine literally takes 20 seconds to boot.

aren't we? my computer boots into kde with all programs loaded in ~30 seconds, not counting the time for me to type my login

>tell you the command that prints out which systemd services are stalling boot
>"do you have any fucking clue what that command does lol, that shit isn't at all relevant"
ok kid

blame is nearly irrelevant for that because of the way the timing and loading works.
systemd-analyze critical-chain
actually gives relevant information about delays.
fucking retards shitting things up with commands they don't even know how to use.

>state fact people have known about Windows for over 25 years
>lole your hardware sux
It matters not how powerful your hardware is. The bottleneck is always the disk for Windows' performance issues. It can be alleviated by a good SSD to some extent, but this fundamental design flaw has no excuse. At the end of the day, Linux does not have this problem. In fact, I would say that I have little reason to use an SSD with Linux because I have a 500GB SSD in my laptop and a plain mechanical disk in my desktop and I ahrdly notice a damn difference in most everyday tasks, whilst with my dedicated Windows machine (that rarely gets used) I absolutely HAD to put an SSD in there, or else my boot times and basic everyday snappiness be reduced to molasses. Mind you, an SSD does not make Windows perform well, it makes Windows perform tolerably.

Linux with KDE boots massively faster than Windows on my machine.

my slackware install boots in 3 seconds.
seems like a you issue.

Slackware fag here. Can second.

Attached: motocyclemangetsmajorpuss.png (811x594, 419K)

Attached: mfw using a sane init.jpg (1200x675, 241K)

For me, Fedora is slow as fuck compared to Debian. I’ve read other anons saying the same thing, but it could be due to SELinux as well as the microcode mitigations for spectre and friends that isn’t present in a default Debian install.

I thought we were beyond caring how long shit takes to boot, do you guys not know how to suspend or hibernate?

Using void linux with autox and dwm.
Boots in less than 2 seconds.