Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 27th Aug 2007 22:21 UTC
Windows A curious network performance reduction noticed by many Windows Vista users of the 2CPU forum that became the talk of Slashdot last week has been identified as having been caused not by DRM, as Slashdot users expected, but by a curious prioritization 'feature' of Vista that's intentionally biased toward Media Player at the expense of network and system resources.
Thread beginning with comment 266266
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: I call BS
by MollyC on Tue 28th Aug 2007 10:40 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: I call BS"
MollyC
Member since:
2006-07-04

LOL
I see my previous post was modded down to -3.
God forbid that anyone dare ask someone to clarify what point he's trying to make. Just as long as the point appears to be MS-bashing, it need not be clear, just that it's MS-bashing is merit enough for the point to stand on its own, no matter how vague or cloaked in innuendo it may be.

Two people have "called BS" on Russinovich's analysis, and they refuse to clearly say why, and any request that they make their reasons plain is modded down by those that can't stand to have an actual discussion on the issues.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[5]: I call BS
by dylansmrjones on Tue 28th Aug 2007 12:28 in reply to "RE[4]: I call BS"
dylansmrjones Member since:
2005-10-02

Using words like "bullshit" is almost certain to get modded down here, no matter the content of the post. Happens to all of us, so you can't take that of proof.

But since you like to claim everybody disagreeing with you are idiotic fanatical FLOSS-zombies, it might be you have a very short leash. Especially compared with your own lack of balanced viewpoint, though you are no way near the same "class" as a certain windmill ;)

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[5]: I call BS
by segedunum on Tue 28th Aug 2007 14:00 in reply to "RE[4]: I call BS"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

God forbid that anyone dare ask someone to clarify what point he's trying to make. Just as long as the point appears to be MS-bashing, it need not be clear, just that it's MS-bashing...

Sweetheart, throttling your network speed back to 10% - 15% of full in order to play a MP3 when there is no reason to do is just plain stupidity. No other OS does this, and no other OS has unacceptable amounts of latency that makes it necessary to do that when it comes to multimedia either.

I suggest Microsoft's engineers join the LKML and get involved in all the scheduling debates that have already been made.

Two people have "called BS" on Russinovich's analysis, and they refuse to clearly say why, and any request that they make their reasons plain is modded down by those that can't stand to have an actual discussion on the issues.

I'm not entirely sure what debate you want to have. You can talk about how Russinovitch has explained this until the cows come home, but it is just totally unacceptable for a modern operating system to do this and people are entirely justified in speculating why.

The article mentions that Vista favours multimedia when the CPU is stressed, but the CPU is simply not being stressed by playing a MP3 and using the network at the same time.

From TFA:

"But the amount of throttling Microsoft engineers intentionally chose to employ was based on their assessment of 100 Mbps networks, where fragmentation is great enough that packet receive rates are high."

The problem with this is, what on Earth has a multimedia process got to do with network throttling? Why have other processes not shown this behaviour up? There is simply no need whatsoever to trade off network performance, as per Microsoft's original response.

This doesn't really explain anything. I'm just wondering if Vista's new, pointless, userland audio system is causing performance issues not only for itself, but for everything else.

Edited 2007-08-28 14:08

Reply Parent Score: 6