Except the fact that benchmarks have already been done all over the internet...also such benchmarks between XP and 7 cannot be fair due to a difference in test variables. OS + 3SPs + 9 years of refinement vs. Pre-Release OS...want some fair benchmarks? Throw XP Pre-SP against 7
It is pretty sad that I have to re-iterate the point all the time and yet people still don't get it
Benchmarks are not about '
fairness' - They're about "
what-is".
XP + SP3, is.
XP + SP2, is.
XP + SP1, is, and so are all the rest, on down...
If people choose to, they can "benchmark" any version of Windows 7, from build 7600 (the 'real' thing) ,
down through 7100, Beta, or whatever the hell they want to.
"Benchmarks" have always been biased, one way or the other,
usually by the "Independent Agency" conducting the "benchmark".
Most people do not have the 'technical expertise' to initiate their own,
nor do they have knowledge or resources to pit one against the other,
keeping all things equal.
You neglect to acknowledge the fact that the "3SPs + 9 years of refinement"
heavily contributed to the development of the "Pre-Release OS".
Your post of "non-information" makes one assume that the XP operating system fared better than the competitor.
I haven't read any of the re-iterations
, but I certainly do fit into the category of "...yet people still don't get it".
