Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 12th Dec 2008 23:44 UTC, submitted by google_ninja
Windows 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.
Permalink for comment 340286
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[6]: system requirements
by centos_user on Mon 15th Dec 2008 02:38 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: system requirements"
Member since:

"What the hell are you ranting about? This is a discussion of operating systems...not politics or energy policy. 4Gb of DDR2 or 3 takes barely any more power than 1Gb in terms of a home usage scenario. Your processor uses far more, let alone the POS power supplies that most companies ship with their horrible inefficiencies.

Going from 1Gb to 2Gb on my Laptop with 64bit vista took maybe a minute off my runtime. 2Gb to 4Gb maybe 5mins...wahoo. thats massively expensive...expect my computer hibernates at night time using no power. Oh right, and it COULDNT do that under Ubuntu, of Fedora. Didnt matter if I used the nvidia drivers or the free ones...sleep and hibernation failed every time. My ibook gets it right, my three xp and vista desktops get it right and so does my laptop...but hey lets worry about how much more electricity is going to cost having to have 4Gb of memory in our computers!

Seriously man...get a clue"

In case you have not noticed ENERGY is a KEY point right now, just because Microsoft created a memory/cpu hog of an operating system will not fly in the future. Have you not heard of green computing yet, I guess when the environmentalist go after computing devices you will learn to leave the cpu/memory hog operating systems in the pasture where they belong. Windows is a inefficient operating system, that is why it requires tons of memory and a cpu bigger than a mainframe in computing power 15 years ago.

Like it or not ENERGY is at a crisis in this country it is self made predicament created by the powers that be and electricity is going to get extremely expensive believing me or not it is going to happen.

There is now way home users are going to be able to turn on their computers when this occurs because it will be equivalent to the high gasoline/diesel prices that spiked to $4 to $5 a gallon.

MY POINT is you write programs/operating systems to use the LEAST amount of cpu/memory so you if you code it that way is screams on hardware that is more efficient in design than the current I need 2 gigs to start a Vista box and a million ghz processor to meet the system requirements...

With our new 'Leader' electricity is going to spike with taxes on coal power plants and IT is a major player, do you think when it does big flat panels and other high energy consuming devices will be selling?

What happened to the auto industry is coming to the electronics industry in due time. Obama has stated his plans and taxing coal burning power plants WILL have an affect on you whether you choose to ignore it, Microsoft will have to change it business practices with creating bloated operating systems and get back to a normal system requirement that will not cost consumers $$$ per month to run.

Edited 2008-12-15 02:55 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 0