Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 23rd Nov 2007 21:17 UTC, submitted by Research Staff
Benchmarks "After a disappointing showing by Windows Vista SP1, we were pleasantly surprised to discover that Windows XP Service Pack 3 (v.3244) delivers a measurable performance boost to this aging desktop OS. Testing with OfficeBench showed a ~10% performance boost vs. the same configuration running under Windows XP with Service Pack 2."
Permalink for comment 286410
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: XP support must be extended
by kaiwai on Sat 24th Nov 2007 03:41 UTC in reply to "RE: XP support must be extended"
kaiwai
Member since:
2005-07-06

As for XP SP3, I'd read that it was simply the accumulation of all of the previously released security updates and bug fixes that had have been available via Windows Update. Am I to assume from this article that this was that false?


Service packs are more than just accumulated fixes, it also includes 'premium fixes' which enterprise customers pay for. Lets say I have a problem, its very unique, I ring up and under my super-duper support plan which costs an arm and a leg, Microsoft will get a guy to resolve it - then issue a patch for it.

Sun has the same thing; its like saying the quartly update is merely a 'culmination of updates' when in reality, it is a culmination of public updates, premium customer upates and upgrades of some components.

Back on topic, I think the issue that is raise; how come, in a 5 year old operating system, they can still squeeze out performance improvements when compared to Windows Vista which you'd think, should have heaps of room to improve the speed.

When 10.5.1 came out, boot times decreased, some things felt snappier. I loaded up Fedora 8 and compared to Fedora 7, it was snappier on the same hardware. Windows XP SP3 has now been 'benchmarked' to being snappier. Why is Windows Vista the 'odd one out'?

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: 4