Slashdot Mirror
Researchers Sour on Vista Service Pack 1 Performance
Stony Stevenson passed us a link indicating that a group of researchers has described Microsoft's upcoming Windows Vista Service Pack 1 as basically a performance dud. Researchers from the Devil Mountain Software group is claiming that a series of in-house benchmark tests showed that users hoping to receive a speed boost from the update will be disappointed. "Devil Mountain ran its DMS Clarity Studio framework on a laptop Barth described as a "barn burner" -- dual-core processor, dedicated graphics, and either 1GB or 2GB of memory -- to compare performance of the SP1 release candidate that Microsoft released last week with the RTM version that hit general distribution last January. The Vista RTM was not updated with any of the bug fixes, patches or performance packs that Microsoft has pushed through Windows Update since the operating system's debut. 'One gigabyte, 2GB [of memory], it didn't make a difference,' said [CTO Craig] Barth. 'SP1 was never more than 1% or 2% faster.'"
50 million lines of code and they couldn't find anything that needed optimization?? Or were their priorities elsewhere? These days, optimization always seems to be relegated to "low man on the totem pole."
"We can categorically state we have not released man-eating badgers into the area." - UK military spokesman, July 2007
A release candidate should be identical to the actual release; that's why it's called a "release candidate" and not a beta version. The only things that would be changed between the RC and the release are any major bugs such as crashes, exploits, etc. Any performance tweaks would have already been done by the time it hit release candidate status. Similarly any debugging code that would slow things down would have also been removed.
It seems you have to do a lot of research to get vista working decently. I guess this proves that it is not yet ready for the desktop :)
I'm sure the only thing tying you to Windows these days is your own aging skill-set. Let's face it, Windows has always been your bread-and-butter as a programmer right? Well one could see why you would feel slighted when others bash what you've spent a large amount of your life learning and suffering with. The cold truth is: The Windows skill-set is in danger if MS keeps dropping the ball. Every time MS drops a steaming pile of OS on the market, more people make the switch to Apple, or Linux, and your skill-set degrades just a notch. The thought of mass defections from Windows probably makes you wake up in a cold sweat at night. Well, I'm not going to sugar-coat it: Vista is turning many people elsewhere, and Apple is making all the right moves in the market right now to swiftly pick those disenfranchised folks up. It's only a matter of time before the market tips and non-windows machines are the minority in many areas. It may not be tomorrow, or even ten years from now, but I've lost all hope in MS pulling up from the tailspin they are in.
In closing, I think that there is no better time then RIGHT NOW to expand your skill-set to include Windows agnostic developing. Because I'm of the opinion that there is a huge shift happening in the market right now, just very slowly...
God is real unless declared integer.
Although it certainly had it's problems, at least Win ME was usable. Vista gets in the way of absolutely everything! I have never been so irritated with an OS in under 5 minutes of use, until vista came along.
/release and /renew to fix a conflicting IP address, but it gave permission denied error! I had to explicitly select Run As Administrator from the context menu to get elevated permissions just to run ipconfig. Bloody oath! Also, the windows explorer UI is so bloody awful and unusable, it's not even funny.
Using a friend's laptop running vista, logged in as an administrator, trying to copy harmless files from a public folder on my mac to the my documents folder on vista was forbidden. I had to copy to my Win XP machine first and then from there to Vista. Once tried to use ipconfig
Seriously, if my only choice was ME or Vista, I'd go back to ME any day. But luckily I can just stick with OS X Leopard and Win XP.
By reading this signature, you hereby agree with the content of the above comment.
So my DRM is being upgraded? Should I be excited?
The worst thing Microsoft has ever done was put Mickey Mouse in charge of kernel development. Letting Hollywood dictate the kernel design will prove to be the undoing of the Windows platform.
Good security is based upon reality and common sense. Common sense is a function of having common knowledge.
So what you're saying is that you don't care because it's not your primary OS. Those that do care may be thinking of it running as their primary OS. Heck they may be forced to do so at work in a couple of years. Their LIVING may depend on it.
I do use XP as my primary OS at home and at work and you bet I care. It ain't my spare car. It's my primary ride.
How is the parent modded as insightful? He's saying he doesn't give a shit because he hardly uses it.
These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
No, you see, *that* was good as far as an argument against the OP's claim of "straw man". You actually made an argument as to why the article is not making a straw man argument, with evidence to back it up, though it is extacly the same one the the first response from 'faloi'. Great, so far I agree with that, and I said as much.
But that was not *my* argument. My argument was that you can't simply deny any claim of "straw man" based solely upon your perception that it is often misused, which is where you started. And appropriately enough, that makes your last response to me......a "straw man" argument! To which I can only respond...refer to my previous post.
Momentarily, the need for the construction of new light will no longer exist.
Meanwhile, I hear the Walmart Green PC at $199 is selling like hotcakes, because it performs very well running Linux + Enlightenment. Perhaps this shows that people really do care about poor Vista performance. And not what Microsoft claimed they would try to do about it.
Have you got your LWN subscription yet?
Bad permissions cause Vista to copy files VERY slowly because it has to reset them on all files.
On the Lame Excuses List, this falls somewhere above "You can't take bottled water on an airplane or the terrorists might win" but still doesn't beat out "He only hits me because he loves me."
If the equivalents of "cp -r" and "cp -pr" take noticeably different amounts of time to complete on your operating system, something is broken, because a multi-gigahertz processor can finish fiddling with even complicated permission bits long before a 50MB/s disk needs to have them ready to write.