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 561468
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: I don't buy it.
by tylerdurden on Mon 13th May 2013 20:46 UTC in reply to "I don't buy it."
tylerdurden
Member since:
2009-03-17

I don't know if DEC is a good example. They are long gone by now, whereas Microsoft is not only still around but thriving as well.

The two companies have very different definition of what "product" is/was. So corporate cultures may have been almost uncorrelated.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: I don't buy it.
by Tuishimi on Wed 15th May 2013 15:12 in reply to "RE: I don't buy it."
Tuishimi Member since:
2005-07-06

DEC is no longer around because of poor management decisions, products were excellent (both software and hardware).

It was a weird situation as most employees could see the vast spending, uncontrolled growth in non-product-related areas and decisions regarding the future of personal computing and how that should affect the company's business model going forth would cause the company to stumble and fall. It fell hard and fast.

Despite the fact the company is gone, VMS and other divisions of DEC STILL live on, absorbed by other companies.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: I don't buy it.
by tylerdurden on Wed 15th May 2013 18:41 in reply to "RE[2]: I don't buy it."
tylerdurden Member since:
2009-03-17

That's pretty common dissonance among engineering teams; It's always management issues, never technical or engineering ones. Even though management is part of the engineering process ;-).

E.g. Those excellent technical approaches by DEC, in the end, led to products which were either under performing, or priced themselves out of the market, or arrived too late to matter. Whereas, Microsoft's supposedly "sloppier" MO ended up being consistently right on the money, literally. Or at least they were, until other even sloppier and hungrier companies started to pop up trying to eat their lunch. It's the circle of life, I guess...

Reply Parent Score: 2