Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 11th May 2013 21:41 UTC
Windows "Windows is indeed slower than other operating systems in many scenarios, and the gap is worsening." That's one way to start an insider explanation of why Windows' performance isn't up to snuff. Written by someone who actually contributes code to the Windows NT kernel, the comment on Hacker News, later deleted but reposted with permission on Marc Bevand's blog, paints a very dreary picture of the state of Windows development. The root issue? Think of how Linux is developed, and you'll know the answer.
Permalink for comment 561265
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: makes sense
by Valhalla on Sun 12th May 2013 18:31 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: makes sense"
Valhalla
Member since:
2006-01-24

Well this bullshit comes up time and time again, because stuff breaks.

No, this shit comes up time and time again from guys like you and bassbeast who doesn't even run Linux.

How many times has someone's video goes tits up after a kernel upgrade

Yes tell me, how many times? I've used a bleeding edge distro for 5 years, my video drivers (I use NVidia cards) have never caused breakage, only time I had problems with a kernel update which forced me to downgrade was a instability caused by my network driver during a major network driver rewrite.

And this is because I run a bleeding edge distro, Arch (kernel 3.9.2 went into core today), had I been using a stable distro then I would not have been bitten by that bug either.

... and don't give me this "it should be in the kernel" bullshit

What bullshit is that? It works for a goddamn gazillion of hardware drivers, right out of the goddamn box. And unlike Windows which relies on third party drivers, this means that Linux can support all this hardware on ALL the numerous architectures it runs on, which is of course a huge advantage of Linux.

... when you are stuck at a command prompt having to use another machine to google the solution it isn't a lot of fun.

Beats a blue screen of death, see I can play this game of BS too.

Stable API/ABIs are good engineering like it or not.

Yes in a perfect world, in reality there's always a cost like that of poor choices you have to live with in order to ensure backwards compability, the Linux devs went with a middle way, anything inside the kernel can be changed at any time, hence you either put your code in the kernel were it will be maintained against changes, or you do the labour yourself.

Meanwhile breaking kernel to user space interfaces is a big NO.

Reply Parent Score: 4