
I'm sure you're all still (sadly) familiar with the recent '
debate' I had with InfoWorld's Randall Kennedy, which detailed a lot of silly things. The seed of that discussion was planted with Kennedy's first article which, among other things, claimed that Windows 7 performed similarly to Windows Vista (meaning, slower than XP). Leaving the thread count discussion behind, Kennedy
did include a benchmark which showed that Windows 7 performed similar to Windows Vista. There's a new benchmark out now, comparing a slightly more recent build of Windows 7 to Vista RTM/SP1 and XP SP3, and in these tests, Windows 7 blows all of those out of the water.
Member since:
2006-03-18
"I find it amazing how Microsoft can spend millions on an Operating System that cannot allow a 'regular user account' to run programs without administrator or power user rights. "
I stopped reading your comment right there, as this statement alone demonstrates that you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.
Windows, since NT, has supported programs that install and run under a non-admin user account. There have, and always will be certain actions that require higher authorization to execute. It is up to the makers of Windows programs to avoid taking those actions unless absolutely necessary for their program's functioning.
The problems with Windows programs that require admin access for no apparent reason was a problem with the writers of those programs, lazily installing in places that require admin access, or lazily storing settings in the wrong registry locations.