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 561279
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Not in my experience it ain't
by Gullible Jones on Sun 12th May 2013 22:17 UTC
Gullible Jones
Member since:
2006-05-23

I could believe that Windows has all kinds of kernel space issues, but for desktop performance this doesn't really matter - because as good as the Linux kernel might be, the desktop environments basically suck. The desktops are bloated, the graphics drivers are incomplete, and now the desktops rely heavily on the graphics drivers; guess what happens?

Sure, Linux with Openbox or whatever is faster than Windows 7 on well supported hardware. The problem is that maybe 5% of new Linux users can be bothered to configure a standalone window manager. The rest will install *buntu because they're not interested in making work for themselves, and will more likely than not recoil in horror at the bad performance and go straight back to dear old Windows.

TL;DR: a Smart Fortwo can outrace a stock car, if the stock car has bad tires and is towing several tons of lard.

Edited 2013-05-12 22:19 UTC

Reply Score: 1

ze_jerkface Member since:
2012-06-22

You make a good point which is that it depends on which stack you are looking at.

Linux has a better selection of file systems but the video stack in quite inferior. Just ask any RHEL engineer if he would run X on a critical server. Most Windows Servers in the wild (including headless) are running a GUI and the gains from going barebones are minimal.

It also depends on what type of software you run. The MySQL developers have long maintained that their software is not optimized for Windows. Will it run poorly? No, but if you want to squeeze out every last cycle then Linux is a better choice. Is hardware a significant factor in project costs? No, it's the admin costs that matter. Cpus and RAM are dirt cheap, the average enterprise spends more annually on toilet paper. Linux cpu savings mattered a lot more a decade ago.

So it's a more complex situation than faster or slower.

But I will say that Windows Server 2012 is retarded for having forced-Metro. It's insulting really.

Reply Parent Score: 1

Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

The desktops are bloated, the graphics drivers are incomplete, and now the desktops rely heavily on the graphics drivers; guess what happens?


Are you talking about Windows?

Reply Parent Score: 1

Gullible Jones Member since:
2006-05-23

Pardon?

Whatever else you can say about Windows, it usually has very good graphics drivers available. And the Windows desktop does not bork on those occasions when hardware acceleration is not available; I have run Win8 in Virtualbox without graphics acceleration. (Had to actually because the Virtualbox drivers for 8 were broken at the time.)

Linux OTOH is ridiculous about this stuff. All the FOSS drivers are terrible for both 2D and 3D performance, Gnome 3 requires hardware acceleration (unless you want continuous 50% CPU usage from llvmpipe), and Unity is a freaking overgrown Compiz plugin. KDE 4 also assumes good hardware acceleration for rendering widgets and stuff using Qt's native backend. The result is godawful performance.

Xfce of course actually works. But who the hell uses Xfce by default?

Reply Parent Score: 5

Gullible Jones Member since:
2006-05-23

Actually, an addendum: current Linux distros with standalone window managers still suck moose on very low-end machines. ATM I'm using Fluxbox on a netbook, and the performance is disgusting - simple things like menu highlights lag absurdly, and you can see each window fill in as it opens.

I wish GTK+ would just die already.

Edit: unfortunately software is the only damn thing in the whole world for which you need a new version every week just to be secure vs. petty crooks. If cars were like that, nobody would drive.

Edited 2013-05-15 16:57 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2