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 561321
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: This is anti-MS propaganda
by ba1l on Mon 13th May 2013 03:08 UTC in reply to "This is anti-MS propaganda"
Member since:

I honestly don't even know where to start with this...

Test 1... Yep, sounds fair. Those versions of Linux are probably six years newer than that hardware, while XP is six years older and was designed for much weaker hardware. Would comparing with Windows 8 not be a more fair comparison?

As for test 2, what exactly do you think you're measuring? Most VM hosts support Windows better than anything else, and provide fast (enough) video acceleration on Windows guests but generally not Linux guests. Surely a better comparison would be to run then on real hardware, but there really won't be much of a difference. Anything remotely recent is many times faster than either OS requires. Windows might be slightly faster as a desktop OS, but Linux is hardly slow or bloated.

Reply Parent Score: 3