Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 12th Dec 2008 23:44 UTC, submitted by google_ninja
I'm sure you're all still (sadly) familiar with the recent 'debate' I had with InfoWorld's Randall Kennedy, which detailed a lot of silly things. The seed of that discussion was planted with Kennedy's first article which, among other things, claimed that Windows 7 performed similarly to Windows Vista (meaning, slower than XP). Leaving the thread count discussion behind, Kennedy did include a benchmark which showed that Windows 7 performed similar to Windows Vista. There's a new benchmark out now, comparing a slightly more recent build of Windows 7 to Vista RTM/SP1 and XP SP3, and in these tests, Windows 7 blows all of those out of the water.
Thread beginning with comment 340190
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2006-01-02
Member since:2005-07-09
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Member since:
2005-07-12
Being profession would mean ignoring useless performance numbers Unless you're an MS engineer working on Windows 7 I don't see a single professional reason to be interested in those numbers.
They are interesting for fan girls to hype (yet another) Windows version. Funny that they don't get it: Calling version x+1 "soooo much better" is admitting that version x (which they hyped, too) was in fact a piece of junk ..