MX Linux Forum

From the Sourceforge server only, coming up on a month since release:

pae 7,136
non 2,722

TOT 9,858

The proportion of pae:non has risen from about 2:1 for MX-14 and 14.1 to now about 2.6:1

Also, the pae version is now being downloaded on Windows 50% of the time (pic)

Now (data through 7/27)

pae 8,287
non 3,261

TOT 11,548

Very interesting is how flat the pae curve remains after the initial surge--good holding power that suggests strong multiplier effect (word of mouth, forums, blogs, etc.).

Question: Leaving the amount of installed RAM aside, and assuming the CPU is pae-capable, are there any reasons not to install the pae version?

joany wrote:Question: Leaving the amount of installed RAM aside, and assuming the CPU is pae-capable, are there any reasons not to install the pae version?

There is a small performance hit when using PAE. How much is open to question, and on-line estimates tend to be in the range 1-10%.

I suppose the question really (within your parameters) is are there any reasons to use it.

Chris

Coming up on 2 months since the point release (data through 8/17):

pae 11,062
non 4,116

Total 15,176

Curve for pae remains essentially flat at 1,000/week after the initial surge, 50% Windows machines.

2 weeks later, still holding steady at over 1,200/week (SourceForge server only, data as of 8/31):

pae 12,729
non 4,806

Tot 17,535

pae: US 24%, Windows 47%
non: US 23%, Linux 47%

How can we interpret the huge diff in OS between pae and non? Conversion (from XP, for instance) versus preference (from another Xfce distro, for instance)?

Jerry3904 wrote:2 weeks later, still holding steady at over 1,200/week (SourceForge server only, data as of 8/31):

pae 12,729
non 4,806

Tot 17,535

pae: US 24%, Windows 47%
non: US 23%, Linux 47%

How can we interpret the huge diff in OS between pae and non? Conversion (from XP, for instance) versus preference (from another Xfce distro, for instance)?

If I interpret these results properly, 47% Windows pae downloads would imply 53% Linux pae downloads and 47% Linux non-pae downloads would imply 53% Windows non-pae downloads. I'd say a 47/53 vs a 53/47 split isn't very significant -- it's only a 6% bias. Or did I miss something in the math?

The fact that pae has over twice the number of downloads as the non-pae isn't surprising either, considering that a lot of computers in operation today have 4GB or more of RAM installed, which need pae to take full advantage of RAM. The slightly higher use of pae among Linux users could simply mean that Windows users don't know what pae is.

joany wrote:...The slightly higher use of pae among Linux users could simply mean that Windows users don't know the difference.

That's kind of what I was thinking. Also when they see the word "non" they think they might be missing out on something if they use it.

I suppose that's true...as long as Windows and Linux are the only two possibilities.

I doubt it's a term confusion, we used plain language to make it clear what's recommended and why some people might need non-PAE:

Version: PAE (recommended)
Version: non-PAE (for older systems that don't support PAE)

A lot of machines out there are 2 GB machines. Look at the sales figures for average machines sold with how much memory.

By the time you read this, we will have hit 20,000 from the Sourceforge server (data as of 9/14):

pae 14,595
non 5,391
TOT 19,986

Both curves (attached) still flat for the last two months.

From my own observations, many people have no idea what PAE means.

Our download page steers them to the right version in most cases, I think.

Jerry3904 wrote:Our download page steers them to the right version in most cases, I think.

I think it depends on what their background is.

Some Windows users may have no idea what you're talking about here:

*If you are in doubt about which version you need and have Linux already running, open a terminal and enter inxi -f (you may
have to install inxi first). Look at the "CPU Flags" entry; if it doesn't include pae in the list you'll need the non-PAE version.

(and inxi isn't an option for a Windows user)

Yup, that hint is for Linux users, like it says. We need a follow-up sentence that begins: "Windows users. .."

EDIT: searched around a bit, found that this code supposedly will tell the user the situation:It is supposed to return on PAE machines this:Can anyone confirm that?

I can confirm this on a windows machine.

Which Windows platform?

(And no TRUE...)

Jerry3904 wrote:Which Windows platform?

(And no TRUE...)

v6.1.7601 = W7, I think.

For XP, RC My Computer, select Properties, look on the General tab. It will say Physical Address Extension at the bottom if available:
Windows 8 must have PAE available as it won't install without it.

Chris

Jerry3904 wrote:Which Windows platform?

(And no TRUE...)

On a W7 box with PAE, the command shown returns 'PAEEnabled' without 'TRUE'.

On a VB install of W7, without PAE enabled, it returns 'PAEEnabled' with 'TRUE'.

Makes no sense to me...

Chris

jdmeaux1952 wrote:I can confirm this on a windows machine.

Win 7 SP 1

And I know the AMD cpu has pae enabled

chrispop99 wrote:For XP, RC My Computer, select Properties, look on the General tab. It will say Physical Address Extension at the bottom if available:

snapshot42.png

Windows 8 must have PAE available as it won't install without it.

Chris

Thanks. Does that command not work on XP?

Jerry3904 wrote:Does that command not work on XP?

On a VB install, XP does not recognise 'wmic'.

Phil

OK. So to summarize:

On 32bit x86 machines
--W2K and earlier: non-PAE
--XP (and Vista?): RC My Computer, select Properties, look on the General tab
--W7: use command
--W8: PAE automatically enabled

Can anyone check Vista?

Found what looks like a good reference

Jerry3904 wrote:OK. So to summarize:

On 32bit x86 machines
--W2K and earlier: non-PAE
--XP (and Vista?): RC My Computer, select Properties, look on the General tab
--W7: use command
--W8: PAE automatically enabled

Can anyone check Vista?

Found what looks like a good reference

People actually USE Vista???

Good reference.

jdmeaux1952 wrote:Can anyone check Vista?

It's not as bad (for Windows) as it was made out to be. With the appropriate hardware, it's essentially a "busy" version of W7. For all intents and purposes, W7 is Vista with a major service pack.

Today I had three very slow torrent downloaders from (India, Russia, China) and there were only 2 seeders, and 3 peers.
MX-14.2-pae.iso

Just looked at Deluge still only 2 seeders and 4 peers.

This is a week old install in this hardware, but apparently not many seeders at the moment that show in Deluge...

JR

A lot of us have disconnected for one reason or another, I suspect. I will reconnect mine in a couple of hours when I am back on.

Pretty quiet...

I will add that info to the webpage before I leave Wed

Current status as of 9/28:

pae 15,599
non 5,648

TOT 21,247

As before, what continues to fascinate me is how flat the curve is remaining.

I am showing errors seeding Torrents:

linuxtracker.org: Error: Connection refused

Showing no seeders nor peers -

Check their site for a statement. If there is no statement then contact the site Admin. They go down occasionally.

[Trying to wrap up loose ends]

I have the following page linked off the MX download page

http://mepiscommunity.org/node/140

Please review--thanks.

I just edited both uploads so they would be 're-validated' but they are showing an error 'Edit your torrent to resend torrent for validation." Even so, both seem to have their seeds/peers counters reset. I can delete and re-upload, but that would produce entirely new torrent files and then require a new announcement on the forum. I'm trying to avoid that.

pcallahan80 wrote:I just edited both uploads so they would be 're-validated' but they are showing an error 'Edit your torrent to resend torrent for validation." Even so, both seem to have their seeds/peers counters reset. I can delete and re-upload, but that would produce entirely new torrent files and then require a new announcement on the forum. I'm trying to avoid that.

Working now. I can see the seeders and peers, and did a new torrent download AntiX to verify connection is working...

JR

When it reads "stalled" and idle, a stop-and-re-start of Transmission is the only thing I know to do. Sometimes it helps, sometimes not.

Jerry3904 wrote:[Trying to wrap up loose ends]

I have the following page linked off the MX download page

http://mepiscommunity.org/node/140

Please review--thanks.

Windows XP and Vista. Right click My Computer, select Properties, look on the General tab. It will say "Physical Address Extension" at the bottom if available

May need to make clear: "if it says "Physical Address Extension" then pae is the correct version"?

Took me a couple seconds to realize Physical Address Extension stands for pae! Til then it left me confused and thinking the line was incomplete.

Done--that is much clearer, thanks.

It's interesting how flat the line is, it would be a great opportunity to see what's the effect of a distrowatch announcement or review.

BTW, I still want to get "MX Linux" as a separate distro on distrowatch, it's way too different than antiX, it uses different sources, to be considered a "version" of antiX even if there's overlap in the development team.

Jerry3904 wrote:As before, what continues to fascinate me is how flat the curve is remaining.

MX is getting good word of mouth in a number of discussion groups and from a lot of blogger types. Like anything else, if you put out a good product and provide good service (i.e. a good community), people will find you. I know I personally am responsible for a handful of adopters, and they in turn have spoken well of MX to others. No, it's not going to knock off Ubuntu or Mint, but it's making a name for itself.

Yeah, that's the only way I can understand that flatness now for over 10 weeks. And who knows what our other 2 download sources have done over the period...

I wish I knew what Warren used to get for downloads, but he probably doesn't know himself since there was no central source.

Now back after an absence of 3 weeks, see these numbers:

pae 17,924
non 6,613

TOT 24,537

Jerry3904 wrote:Now back after an absence of 3 weeks, see these numbers:

pae 17,924
non 6,613

TOT 24,537

I am not seeing much if any activity on torrents...
non-pae seems to have several slow India leachers late at night PST, but pae in a week has had almost no activity.

Those figures may be on the low side in terms of user numbers. I have set up several MX14 systems from only one download.

Those figures may be on the low side in terms of user numbers.

I think that's right. I keep reporting them as an index of interest--well, mine at the very least--rather than an actual measurement.