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.
Thread beginning with comment 561256
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
...
by Hiev on Sun 12th May 2013 15:44 UTC
Hiev
Member since:
2005-09-27

If that is true, Why do I feel Windows 8 Desktop faster than any Linux distro? or is it this exclusive for servers?

Edited 2013-05-12 15:53 UTC

Reply Score: 4

RE: ...
by lucas_maximus on Sun 12th May 2013 17:40 in reply to "..."
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

The post is bullshit, the proof is un-verifiable outside of Microsoft.

The fact that memory usage has reduced from Vista onwards pretty much confirms this is bullshit.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE: ...
by ze_jerkface on Mon 13th May 2013 01:29 in reply to "..."
ze_jerkface Member since:
2012-06-22

The Windows XP/Vista/7/8 desktop is no doubt faster than any X/KDE/GNOME combination.

But if you are talking about Linux as in Linux the kernel it depends on the measurement.

I haven't seen benchmarks recently but Linux will probably beat Windows for raw file i/o. How much of the difference matters in the real world is another question.

The situation is similar to 3D cards. It's not always about which is faster, it also depends on what you want to run.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: ...
by cdude on Mon 13th May 2013 05:27 in reply to "RE: ..."
cdude Member since:
2008-09-21