Who Has Faster Pipes? Linux, Win2000, WinXP Compared

SeaBait writes: "This revealing article about the High-performance programming techniques on Linux and Windows shows that Linux rules. The performance testing was on Pipes(interprocess communication mechanism available on both Windows and Linux and UNIX). Although I new Linux would fare the best, the poor performance of Windows XP was a surprise. Windows 2000 actually did better than XP!"

Comments

Can you say "flamebait"?

[DrPascal]

I'm a fan of Slashdot, but I get a little sick of the Windows/Linux comparisons, -especially- when the post includes something like "but THIS test shows that Linux rocks!" Yay. Are we going to argue over PCs vs. Macs next?

Re:Can you say "flamebait"?

[blang]

Posting benchmarks results is a flamebait? Feel free to feel as sick as you want. Puke all over the place as far as I am conserned. It's well deserved. Bwhuaa.

PCs vs. Macs.

[AltGrendel]

We already did that.

Macs "lost".

Good hardware, bad marketing.

Tired

[Null_Packet]

Honest, this isn't a flame:

Can we set up a mailing list of some kind to know when Slashdot is done bashing microsoft? Either way you look at it, it's getting fscking old.

Besides the fact that XP in this article could have been the Home Edition, and could be heavily influenced by a number of factors- wow. Pipes.

Does it take a rocket scientist to realize that this is probably the last factor that goes through people's heads when purchasing an OS/Platform?

Maybe the motto for Linux should be 'Fastest Pipes in the business' oh wait- successfull business don't use linux. They use BSDI. Or Solaris. Or Windows.

Yes, it is off-topic...

[Futurepower(tm)]

Yes, it is off-topic, but here is an answer:

XP stands for eXtra Pain.

Re:Premature

[spectecjr]

Uh the reason so many people will pick apart studies claiming Windows superiority is because heistory has shown us that they are usually untrue. I know Linux is technically superior to Windows I know Linux is more powerful than Windows, I don't need a study to prove it.

I guess you also know that the Earth goes around the Sun.

Is it dark where you are? I mean, surely there's not much illumination when your head is stuck up your ass.

Oh, and by the way, Windows doesn't constantly crash, unless a Linux user is running it.

Re:Premature

[jgerman]

In a forum like slashdot I only have enough space to generalize but I'll throw a couple of answers out. Let's start with the fact that I have the source to my software, if there's something I don't like about a particular piece of software I can change it, that is power, that is flexibility, that is customization and that's at the lowest level and is an inherent characteristic of OSS. Two, good linux software offers infinitely more cutomization than Windows in that I can choose what file manager to use, what window manager, and the ability to write my own very easily if that's what I wish. If I want a full featured desktop I can have one, if I want a small lightweight blazing fast window manager, I can have one of them as well. More importantly many window manages, such as Sawfish, allow unlimited customization in the form of embedded scripting.

Three, let's look at your absolutely clueless statementL

You see I find that Windows as a whole is more stable than the components of linux. Just because the webserver in my workstation doesn't go down, it doesn't mean that my work isn't interrupted when my X server/web browser/email client/cd burning software/etc. crashes. I personally don't have that problem, on the rare occasion when software does crach (which is certainly less often than windows) it is obvious that having only the bad process crash is preferable to having the whole system brought down by a user process. Let's look at it in detail, you and I are working on the exact same project, we both have open a web browser, an email client, and some terminals. Both of our web browsers crash at exactly the same time. IE takes down your whole machine, blue screen... reboot, I restart my browser and continue working. It's not that hard to see who is better off. Not to mention the fact that you have just lost all unsaved information in the other processes where I have not.

Four, Linux has more power in that all desktop functionality has its equivalent in the filesystem in a format that makes intergrates the two seamlessly, unlike windows which hides the gui aspects from the user.

Five, my desktop software doesn't store files in a binary proprietary format, which by the way is bloated to ridiculous sizes by copyright lines and privacy invading user id's.

Six, (this is fun), My spreadsheet can handle more than 65,000 rows.

Seven, the majority of Linux distributions come pre configured for invaluable tools like ssh, traceroute, and tcpdump.

Eight, I didn't have to pay for my software.

Nine, The whole concept of a GUI is fluff to your day to day desktop use, you can get everything done with just a command prompt... faster.

Ten, I can create a professionally typset document in less time than you, without removing my hands from the keyboard. Cavemen pointed at things and grunted, it's no suprise that that's the only way that Windows users can interact with their machines.

Eleven, I have complete control over my OS. In the extremely unlikely event that my software decides to send personal information back to the makers I can turn it off and continue to use the product. You have absolutely no control.

I could go on forever, but like I said, space limitations. It's ridiculous for a Windows user to argue the technical superiority of windows over Linux. As of right now my work desktop Linux box has been up for over 203 days. Which coincidentally is the last time I upgraded the kernel. How long has your Windows machine been up?

As far as Windows being more stable, that's simple laughable, Windows isn't even stable running under it's own power with no extra software. Hell 95 had a timed meltdown, if you left it running you could predict to the minute when it would go down, if it managed to make it that far.

I didn't even have to go into the whole spectrum of tools that are available for *nix that are unheard of on Windows.