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 561279
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Not in my experience it ain't
by Gullible Jones on Sun 12th May 2013 22:17 UTC
Gullible Jones
Member since:
2006-05-23

I could believe that Windows has all kinds of kernel space issues, but for desktop performance this doesn't really matter - because as good as the Linux kernel might be, the desktop environments basically suck. The desktops are bloated, the graphics drivers are incomplete, and now the desktops rely heavily on the graphics drivers; guess what happens?

Sure, Linux with Openbox or whatever is faster than Windows 7 on well supported hardware. The problem is that maybe 5% of new Linux users can be bothered to configure a standalone window manager. The rest will install *buntu because they're not interested in making work for themselves, and will more likely than not recoil in horror at the bad performance and go straight back to dear old Windows.

TL;DR: a Smart Fortwo can outrace a stock car, if the stock car has bad tires and is towing several tons of lard.

Edited 2013-05-12 22:19 UTC

Reply Score: 1