Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

Re: Is Windows becoming irrelevant?

  • Subject: Re: Is Windows becoming irrelevant?
  • From: Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 01 May 2006 16:51:37 +0100
  • Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
  • Organization: schestowitz.com / MCC / Manchester University
  • References: <ru45g.7459$IQ1.1006@fe36.usenetserver.com> <1146425329.579373.85790@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <aYSdnQ2YLaAdj8jZnZ2dnUVZ_tWdnZ2d@comcast.com> <1206037.lZo70VPoHl@schestowitz.com> <1146428343.941488.317200@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <2815337.NP3WtWymkS@schestowitz.com> <NPmdnfEpFLFLvsvZ4p2dnA@comcast.com>
  • Reply-to: newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • User-agent: KNode/0.7.2
__/ [ Michael B. Trausch ] on Monday 01 May 2006 16:06 \__

> Roy Schestowitz wrote in <2815337.NP3WtWymkS@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> on Mon May 1
> 2006 01:37:
>>> 
>>> The point is that all the good linux apps run on windows too (the list
>>> you gave). So, if you use windows you get the best of both, while on
>>> linux you'll miss half of them - that makes windows a much superior
>>> choice to me.
>> 
>> Okay, but it _does_ change the tune, doesn't it? *smile* We have at least
>> reached a partial state of consent. Every excellent program for GNU/Linux
>> is sooner or later ported to native (non-X-dependent) OS X and Windows. In
>> that sense, Windows users have little to lose other than money to be spent
>> on licences, the loss of security, and the increased need for maintenance
>> (e.g. filesystem corrections, Registry bloat, occasional re-installation).
>> 
> 
> Yeah - though some of that software runs considerably slower.  Consider
> Cygwin and the GNU Cygwin toolchain on Windows -- things like running shell
> scripts and the like are very slow compared to Linux on the same system.  I
> suspect that this has something to do with Windows' missing POSIX support,
> though I could be wrong.

I once attempted an amateur's benchmark. I ran pscp on Windows
(Linux->Windows, then Windows->Linux). I used that box to channel large
heaps of media, so I saw this as a good assessment/sanity check opportunity.
Windows was roughly 3 times slower than its equivalent on Linux->Linux with
scp. I'll never forget it. The Windows XP box was very modern and it was
running nothing else (apart from AV and other crucial appendages).

Best wishes,

Roy

PS - Another experience I will not forget: Sending files to a colleague with
Windows 2000 box via FTP. On GNU/Linux-SuSE 8.1-KDE-Konqueror (multithreaded
by default), this took about 5 minutes. On Windows-Windows Explorer this
took roughly 3 hours. When my colleague cancelled the download (due to
impracticality of this) and erased what had already been transferred, she
hit the wall and discovered the infamous deletion bug -- that which had
persisted in Windows since its 95 release. It was never fixed, until a few
years ago. Her computer froze for 10 minutes. If I hadn't told her it was a
known bug, she would have rebooted.

I am never doing that again. She can burn her time working like Sisyphus < 
http://www.mythweb.com/encyc/entries/sisyphus.html >, but when others are in
the loop, she ought to use a proper research (or lack thereof) platform.
Once of my motives for ditching Windows entirely is was its incapability of
dealing with a deep file structure/hierarchy. When the filesystem is
deficient, there is not much hope for the O/S that sits atop it.

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index