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 561307
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
This is anti-MS propaganda
by triangle on Mon 13th May 2013 02:30 UTC
triangle
Member since:
2013-05-13

This is total propaganda and I am sick of it. Windows is BY FAR the fastest OS. Linux is absolute junk. While the Linux kernel may be OK...and I stress may be OK... let us not accept such things on blind faith... Linux as a complete operating system is total garbage. I could easily (as could any honest person with a little experience and honesty) write endlessly about all the problems with Linux... let me focus on speed. Linux fast? TEST ONE: Find an older computer. Let's say an Athlon XP 2500+ with 1GB ram (that is a LOT of ram!) and ATI 8500 radeon and install Ubuntu 12/13, or Mint 13/14, or Fedora 18. It won't even run and if it does it will be so slow that the OS won't be usable. Any GUI operation will take like a minute. Now load Windows XP on the same computer and it will turn into a speed demon. Please stop with the propaganda. TEST TWO: Find a system such as a core 2 duo with 4GB ram and mid range gf card like NVIDIA 8400. Now set up an Ubuntu12/13 or Mint13/14 VM, and a Windows 7 VM. The Linux VM will be unusable because it is a resource hog. The Windows 7 VM will be lightning fast. CONCLUSION: It is a fact that Windows is faster and lighter as a complete operating system than Linux or MAC (yes, you can set up mac a vm also). A Linux freak may argue that you can strip down Linux to the kernel andno x server and it will be faster. Or use some primitive bare minimum GUI system. Yeah? So what? That is like comparing a non functional OS to a functional one and saying that the non-functional (or barely functional one) is superior because it is faster. No... no. Let us compare apples to apples and oranges to oranges. In other words, real world tests of modern COMPLETE Linux distros and modern complete Microsoft OSs..... as I have above. That is what matters. The truth is, and I know this will hurt... Linux isn't even up to Windows 95 level when it comes to functionality. And MAC is not much better than Linux. No, I'm not a Microsoft fanboy just sick of this BS. I use Linux at work (soft engineer), MAC i7 and Windows 7 gaming PC at home.

Reply Score: -1

RE: This is anti-MS propaganda
by Soulbender on Mon 13th May 2013 02:50 in reply to "This is anti-MS propaganda"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

This is total propaganda and I am sick of it. Windows is BY FAR the fastest OS. Linux is absolute junk.


The irony of this statement in relation to your post is epic.

Reply Parent Score: 4

triangle Member since:
2013-05-13

Oh really? Maybe you are too brain washed to think for yourself. You heard Linux is fast and you actually believe it. Tell you what... let's stick to facts. Run TEST 1 and TEST 2 in my post and get back to me with your results. Facts mate... facts. The truth will set you free.

Reply Parent Score: -1

RE: This is anti-MS propaganda
by ba1l on Mon 13th May 2013 03:08 in reply to "This is anti-MS propaganda"
ba1l Member since:
2007-09-08

I honestly don't even know where to start with this...

Test 1... Yep, sounds fair. Those versions of Linux are probably six years newer than that hardware, while XP is six years older and was designed for much weaker hardware. Would comparing with Windows 8 not be a more fair comparison?

As for test 2, what exactly do you think you're measuring? Most VM hosts support Windows better than anything else, and provide fast (enough) video acceleration on Windows guests but generally not Linux guests. Surely a better comparison would be to run then on real hardware, but there really won't be much of a difference. Anything remotely recent is many times faster than either OS requires. Windows might be slightly faster as a desktop OS, but Linux is hardly slow or bloated.

Reply Parent Score: 3

triangle Member since:
2013-05-13

Fair enough.

Windows 8 would not be a better choice than XP in my opinion. In terms of date, your point is well taken but I would argue that "functionality" is the key concept. For a given functionality what overhead is there? Today's Ubuntu and Mint (some of the most pop distros and my fav also) are not yet on the same level of functionality as Windows XP. XP is far superior imo. If it came down to debate, it would not be hard to defend this point... even though I know it sound provocative. At the same time, Windows 7/8 is not much slower than XP if at all... so we could do as you say...but Win 7/8 require more ram than 1GB. I suppose it comes down to ideology. It is easy for us to set the date as the defining point. Functionality is a debatable sticking point. The major thing in my mind, is that XP is still modern in the sense that I can get drivers for XP even for modern computers (let's say if i wanted to build one). On the other hand, if I built a computer today, I would have to use bleeding edge Linux just to have a chance to run Linux. So in this respect, I think XP vs LinuxCurrent is fair game. Also, because of the centralised software scheme in Linux land, one is forced to use a relatively new distro. It is not like I can use an 8 year old Linux distro on the Athlon and be productive and secure.

As far as the second test goes, I have ran those OS's on bare metal on those systems. Linux is noticeably slower. I mentioned virtualization because there the additional overhead makes the difference even more obvious. As far as VM bias towards windows... VirtualBox does not bias towards Microsoft products.

Edited 2013-05-13 03:54 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 0

Gullible Jones Member since:
2006-05-23

You lost me on the VMs bit. 1 GB Ubuntu VMs on a powerful machine like what you describe will work just as well as Windows. Hell, on a Core 2 Duo you can run Unity 3D with no hardware acceleration, on one core. That's how damn powerful modern CPUs are.

ATM I'm running Linux with the Mate desktop on a 1 GB Intel Atom netbook with trashy Intel graphics, less powerful than the obsolete configuration you mention. It's about as fast as Windows XP - i.e. not very, but usable.

OTOH, Gnome 3 makes this netbook cry. Thus, I reiterate: the problem is the desktop stack.

Edited 2013-05-13 12:58 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

Why does Ubuntu run like crap on virtual box then, while Windows 8 runs nice and smoothly?

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE: This is anti-MS propaganda
by Yagami on Mon 13th May 2013 15:16 in reply to "This is anti-MS propaganda"
Yagami Member since:
2006-07-15

Thanks !!

I appreciate your posts !

Usually, we here have Vim vs Emacs, Gnome vs KDE, Ubuntu vs Debian, Google vs Apple... everyone usually here is a little fanboy but within reason.

but your posts are highly original ! I must congratulate you !

You are the most delusional troll I can remember on Osnews ! You just talk bullshit, like you know everything , everyone else are liers and only you know the truth!

Its so stupid that I just suggest everyone to just laugh and forget what you said ! ( not worth mentioning linux servers on the world, the embedded market, linux always need less ram and cpu that windows usually, even nvidia and steam developers reporting FPS increase on linux comparing to windows ) !

Other people must really like you !!! ;)

Thank you for a good laugh !!! You are the King Idiot !

Reply Parent Score: 3

triangle Member since:
2013-05-13

You are most welcome. I should also add that the market really likes Linux. That is why despite being free Linux has a 1% market share. Because it is so awesome.

Or wait...

Does Linux have a 1% market share because it is so awesome or is it because people like myself are too stupid too see the awesome that is Linux? Isn't the prevailing view of Linux users that ordinary people are just too dumb too understand how amazing Linux is?

Yes, you are too smart and too cleaver for the rest of us. Isn't it wonderful up on that high horse mate?

Edited 2013-05-13 15:28 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 0

RE[2]: This is anti-MS propaganda
by zima on Sat 18th May 2013 18:00 in reply to "RE: This is anti-MS propaganda"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

even nvidia and steam developers reporting FPS increase on linux comparing to windows ) !

That is likely largely meaningless... (replies in http://www.osnews.com/thread?561343 sub-thread)

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: This is anti-MS propaganda
by lemur2 on Tue 14th May 2013 11:43 in reply to "This is anti-MS propaganda"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

This is total propaganda and I am sick of it. Windows is BY FAR the fastest OS. Linux is absolute junk. While the Linux kernel may be OK...and I stress may be OK... let us not accept such things on blind faith... Linux as a complete operating system is total garbage.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/news/10049444/International-S...

International Space Station to boldly go with Linux over Windows

Computers aboard the International Space Station are to be switched from Windows XP to the Linux operating system in an attempt to improve stability and reliability.

Dozens of laptops on the ISS's 'opsLAN' network - which provides the ship's crew with vital capabilities for day-to-day operations, from telling the astronauts where they are to interfacing with onboard cameras - will be switched, removing Windows entirely from the ISS.

“We migrated key functions from Windows to Linux because we needed an operating system that was stable and reliable – one that would give us in-house control. So if we needed to patch, adjust or adapt, we could," said Keith Chuvala of the United Space Alliance, which runs opsLAN for NASA.

Astronauts using the system were trained on specific courses tailored by the non-profit Linux Foundation.

Linux is already used to run various systems aboard the ISS, including the world's first 'Robonaut', sent to the Space Station in 2011. 'R2' can be manipulated by astronauts as well as ground controllers and is designed to carry out tasks "too dangerous or mundane" for astronauts in microgravity, according to the Linux Foundation.

Tailored versions of Linux are widely used in scientific projects, including CERN’s Large Hadron Collider.


http://www.pcworld.com/article/238068/how_linux_mastered_wall_stree...

How Linux Mastered Wall Street

When it comes to the fast-moving business of trading stocks, bonds and derivatives, the world's financial exchanges are finding an ally in Linux, at least according to one Linux kernel developer working in that industry.

This week, at the annual LinuxCon conference in Vancouver, Linux kernel contributor Christoph Lameter will discuss how Linux became widely adopted by financial exchanges, those high-speed computerized trading posts for stocks, bonds, derivatives and other financial instruments.

As an alternative to traditional Unix, Linux has become a dominant player in finance, thanks to the operating-system kernel's ability to pass messages very quickly, Lameter said in an interview with IDG. In fact, the emerging field of high-frequency trading (HFT) would not be possible without the open-source operating system, he argued. Lameter himself was hired as a consultant by one exchange -- he won't say which one -- based on his work in assembling large-scale Linux clusters.


http://www.smartcompany.com.au/information-technology/050276-ibm-in...

IBM, Intel and Linux dominate Top 500 supercomputer market

In terms of operating systems, 462 out of the 500 supercomputers on the list use Linux, 25 run on Unix, and just 13 are based on Windows.


Edited 2013-05-14 11:56 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

ISS are using hardened machines for outerspace, not modern machines.

Super computers != Desktop operating systems

I could go on. We are talking about primarily desktop operating systems with Windows ... and none of the examples prove it is a desktop operating system. It proves that it works well in those circumstances.

Lemur2, they guy that doesn't understand what a use case is or why it really matters when evaluating software.

Edited 2013-05-14 18:19 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: This is anti-MS propaganda
by zima on Fri 17th May 2013 19:42 in reply to "RE: This is anti-MS propaganda"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

One can argue that HFT is not a good thing...

Reply Parent Score: 2