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 561499
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[5]: This is anti-MS propaganda
by bert64 on Tue 14th May 2013 07:38 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: This is anti-MS propaganda"
bert64
Member since:
2007-04-23

Why would you install a legacy distro instead of just a lightweight distro? A machine with 1gb of ram is not bad at all, i run virtual machines with considerably less.

Also, XP lacks drivers for much of this hardware by default, which means you have to either use a modified install disc or install the drivers all manually, which can be extremely painful especially if you're not sure what hardware is present. In some cases you might actually need a floppy disc (!) to install XP on a machine where the SATA controller is not supported by default.

Amusing you call a centralised repository flawed, when the windows approach (download arbitrary binaries from random sites) is far more flawed, and requires considerably more user knowledge in order to avoid malware infestations. Also the "flaw" as you call it seems to be that the repository is outdated, but there is no real reason to run an old linux distro when the new ones are available for free.

I'm also curious as to how you had problems with older radeon cards, since i have had no problems using older cards with modern linux distros (7000, 9200, x1600, x1900) and they work out of the box with the open source drivers. Conversely these cards won't work at all with windows 7/8, and in some cases only run on xp if you're willing to accept drivers with known security holes.

XP is not "up to date software", and applications are only still being made compatible with it because many users have not upgraded to newer versions. Linux doesn't have the problems windows has which cause people to avoid upgrading, problems like lock-in, lack of drivers in newer versions, increased hardware requirements, cost etc. There is very little reason to ever run an old version of linux, even on old hardware.

The biggest problem with linux that you highlight, is that many hardware manufacturers are still stuck with the windows mentality of releasing closed source drivers... Open drivers work far better, and are the reason why modern linux supports all manner of hardware which is abandoned by modern windows, especially the 64bit variants. While 64bit linux supports almost all the hardware the 32bit version did simply by recompiling the drivers, once 64bit windows came out only new hardware ever got drivers, and there is all manner of older stuff which is unusable.
And then there's other processors, linux on arm inherits the majority of the drivers from x86 linux, so if you have an arm (or mips or ppc etc) based machine with pci or usb slots, you can plug all manner of hardware in and have it work. If you are running windows ce, or windows rt on such hardware you have extremely limited driver support - because the manufacturers only ever made x86 binary drivers.

Reply Parent Score: 3