Linked by Amjith Ramanujam on Tue 22nd Jul 2008 17:54 UTC
Benchmarks David Williams over at iTWire has done a comparison of Windows vs Linux. It is performed by doing functionally identical tasks in both the OSes. This comparison is not a fair one by any measure. The laptops running the Windows and Linux were different in the hardware config and the software used for the tests were comparable but clearly different (MS Office vs OpenOffice; IE vs Firefox 3).
Thread beginning with comment 324143
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Worst part is
by vijayd81 on Tue 22nd Jul 2008 23:20 UTC
vijayd81
Member since:
2008-07-18

Both Firefox3 and OpenOffice are available for windows. I can forget the fact the hardware is different. Is he stupid enough, not to use the same applications?

Reply Score: 1

RE: Worst part is
by Bending Unit on Tue 22nd Jul 2008 23:32 in reply to "Worst part is"
Bending Unit Member since:
2005-07-06

It doesn't matter since the hardware is different. Nothing matters.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE: Worst part is
by cyclops on Tue 22nd Jul 2008 23:44 in reply to "Worst part is"
cyclops Member since:
2006-03-12

Both Firefox3 and OpenOffice are available for windows. I can forget the fact the hardware is different. Is he stupid enough, not to use the same applications?


Thats not the comparison. There are a stack of comparisons all over the net, and Microsoft again come across badly in the area of Memory footprint for these applications...but that is not the point of the article. Which is having a functional OS+Office+Web Browser as far as memory footprint goes Open source is superior to Microsoft Proprietary products.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Worst part is
by lemur2 on Wed 23rd Jul 2008 03:06 in reply to "RE: Worst part is"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

"Both Firefox3 and OpenOffice are available for windows. I can forget the fact the hardware is different. Is he stupid enough, not to use the same applications?
Thats not the comparison. There are a stack of comparisons all over the net, and Microsoft again come across badly in the area of Memory footprint for these applications...but that is not the point of the article. Which is having a functional OS+Office+Web Browser as far as memory footprint goes Open source is superior to Microsoft Proprietary products. "

Exactly. The point is that on a lesser machine Linux delivers more functionality and performs better than Vista on a higher-spec more expensive machine, running the "typical" desktop applications that one would presumably want to run on those systems.

After all ... what is the point of using an expensive machine bogged down with Vista and DRM and encumberances such as anti-malware, Aero, WGA etc, etc to run applications such as OpenOffice.org and firefox which run faster on a far cheaper machine?

The fact that Vista won't even run on the machines in the "hot" new notebook category, but Linux runs fine and better than XP on those same machines, should make this fact self-evident, but it doesn't hurt to bring it to people's attention again.

What is interesting is the dearth of articles featuring real, direct, head-to-head-on-the-exact-same-hardware comparisons being published.

If I were the paranoid sort, I might infer from such a lack of direct comparisons that one influential party might not want such articles published for public scrutiny. People might after all begin to wonder why they are not being offered the best value-for-money option in the stores.

Edited 2008-07-23 03:12 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4