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 561389
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Gullible Jones
Member since:
2006-05-23

Pardon?

Whatever else you can say about Windows, it usually has very good graphics drivers available. And the Windows desktop does not bork on those occasions when hardware acceleration is not available; I have run Win8 in Virtualbox without graphics acceleration. (Had to actually because the Virtualbox drivers for 8 were broken at the time.)

Linux OTOH is ridiculous about this stuff. All the FOSS drivers are terrible for both 2D and 3D performance, Gnome 3 requires hardware acceleration (unless you want continuous 50% CPU usage from llvmpipe), and Unity is a freaking overgrown Compiz plugin. KDE 4 also assumes good hardware acceleration for rendering widgets and stuff using Qt's native backend. The result is godawful performance.

Xfce of course actually works. But who the hell uses Xfce by default?

Reply Parent Score: 5