Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 7th Jan 2006 18:50 UTC
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 82910
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Member since:
2005-07-12
The article states that the purpose of MS's tests is to look at:
how well the latest Windows client software runs on legacy hardware in comparison to its Linux competitors...given Microsoft's desire to upgrade every possible customer to the latest version of Windows
On one hand, MS is suggesting Vista will require a relativley state-of-the-art CPU and graphics system to properly handle Vista, but in this article they are testing legacy hardware back to the Jurrasic era to validate how well it can be upgraded? Both can't be true. And excuse me while i go reset the BS detector. It just went off again.