Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 7th Jan 2006 18:50 UTC
Talk, Rumors, X Versus Y The study described in the following article was done by Mirosoft, so run to the kitchen and get some grains of salt. "Microsoft's Linux and open-source lab on the Redmond campus has been running some interesting tests of late, one of which was looking at how well the latest Windows client software runs on legacy hardware in comparison to its Linux competitors. The tests, which found that Windows performed as well as Linux on legacy hardware when installed and run out-of-the-box, were done in part to give Microsoft the data it needed to effectively "put to rest the myth that Linux can run on anything." Do with the results as you please, but the topic is interesting nonetheless. What are your experiences?
Thread beginning with comment 82837
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Celver Writing!!
by Jezza on Sat 7th Jan 2006 19:39 UTC
Jezza
Member since:
2005-10-13

""Memory prevented the successful installation on a typical 1997 system, as 32MB of memory is not enough to install most Linux distributions or to run desktop applications with acceptable performance. A memory upgrade could prolong the life of such hardware, but the cost and effort of locating old memory and installing it onto all corporate clients significantly reduces the potential savings," Hilf said.

Minimum requirements for office productivity performance on a Linux system were any Pentium II (PII) system with at least 64MB of RAM, he said, adding that playback of sound and video would typically require a PII 400 or better.
"

I love the wording in this article... At the start they say "Windows XP performed just as well as Suse 9.2 Mandriva, FC, Xandros...."

Then they add this ^ What they want us to think is that while Linux struggles on a PII with 64Mb RAM etc... Win XP will run fine. They even mention 32Mb RAM earlier. I used to have an XP system with 128Mb DDRRAM and a 1.6Ghz CPU. It would take WinXP a good 5 minutes to load with "out of the box" settings to a usable desktop, where Mandrake 7.2 would load and I would be logged in within 2mins...

Microsoft have some of the cleverest writers I've ever seen. No mention of Windows working as well as Linux on these machines, but we all assumed it when we first read it through. Wasn't until my second take until I saw there was no mention of WinXP perfomence on these machines.

Clever!

Reply Score: 5

RE: Celver Writing!!
by smashIt on Sun 8th Jan 2006 00:56 in reply to "Celver Writing!!"
smashIt Member since:
2005-07-06

used to have an XP system with 128Mb DDRRAM and a 1.6Ghz CPU. It would take WinXP a good 5 minutes to load with "out of the box" settings to a usable desktop, where Mandrake 7.2 would load and I would be logged in within 2mins...
you either don't know how to use a watch or you never had win xp runing on this system.
I use win xp on 500mhz with 192mb sd-ram and it doesn't even come close to 5 minutes.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Celver Writing!!
by jsight on Sun 8th Jan 2006 03:04 in reply to "RE: Celver Writing!!"
jsight Member since:
2005-07-06

you either don't know how to use a watch or you never had win xp runing on this system.
I use win xp on 500mhz with 192mb sd-ram and it doesn't even come close to 5 minutes.


Well, I've used XP on a box with 128 MB and a 2.4 Ghz Celeron (crappy chip... benchmarks closer to a P4 1.5 Ghz), and you're right, bootup was less than 5 minutes.

Unfortunately, the box was PAINFULLY slow. It was nearly unusable, and was quickly upgraded to 768 MB, which resolved the performance problems nicely.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Celver Writing!!
by Jezza on Sun 8th Jan 2006 10:06 in reply to "RE: Celver Writing!!"
Jezza Member since:
2005-10-13

Are you timing up to the little jingle noise, or are you meaning until you get a usable desktop. True it will present you with the desktop pretty quick, but click on the start menu and try to connect to ADSL or dial-up networking and you get no option to do so. The start menu will close again before the entries are there. Windows will give you a desktop quite fast, but it's not usable. As soon as I get into my KDE desktop it's usable for whatever I want, even restoring old session data (which windows doesn't do) KD is up and running faster than WinXP

Reply Parent Score: 2