Windows Kernel. We Are Slower Than Other Operating Systems

[A Guy]

"I Contribute to the Windows Kernel. We Are Slower Than Other Operating Systems. Here Is Why."

I was explaining on Hacker News why Windows fell behind Linux in terms of operating system kernel performance and innovation. And out of nowhere an anonymous Microsoft developer who contributes to the Windows NT kernel wrote a fantastic and honest response acknowledging this problem and explaining its cause. His post has been deleted! Why the censorship? I am reposting it here. This is too insightful to be lost. [Edit: The anonymous poster himself deleted his post as he thought it was too cruel and did not help make his point, which is about the social dynamics of spontaneous contribution. However he let me know he does not mind the repost at the condition I redact the SHA1 hash info, which I did.] [Edit: A second statement, apologetic, has been made by the anonymous person. See update at the bottom.]

Source

A Guy

 

[smarteyeball]

Ouch. Worse part is that it's not surprising

 

[Cr00zng]

It seems that the anonymous person from MS was just venting some frustration in the first posting, that he promptly rescinded in the second one, quote:

All this has gotten out of control. I was much too harsh, and I didn't intend this as some kind of massive exposé. This is just grumbling. I didn't appreciate the appetite people outside Microsoft have for Kremlinology. I should have thought through my post much more thoroughly. I want to apologize for presenting a misleading impression of what it's like on the inside.

I also want to apologize for what I said about devdiv. Look: I might disagree with the priorities of our compiler team, and I might be mystified by why certain C++ features took longer to implement for us than for the competition, but seriously good people work on the compiler. Of course they know what reference cycles are. We're one of the only organizations on earth that's built an impressive optimizing compiler from scratch, for crap's sake.

Is Windows kernel slower than Linux, or that was just an attention getting statement as well?

 

[FerchogtX]

Well... I'm not that in fond of knowing about kernel stuff and such... but this guy is not realizing that maybe is not all the fault from the Windows NT kernel but maybe other stuff that slows down the system?... He is not taking into account that Linux runs without any sort of AV protection (and that means realtime protection) just because there is no malware (or seem not to exist at least) for that OS, but if you see Windows, you see that you need an AV protection + patches + firewall + any stuff I can possibly forget so far... And that, slows down even the best OS in market...

Doesn't he realize why Windows 8 seems faster than Windows 7 in terms of processing cycles? Simple... W8 includes it's own AV software, that integrates all its features into the kernel itself...

I think, at least in my very humble oppinion, that is really unfair to say that Windows kernel is slower than others... because we are not taking into account all the things I said before...

 

[lehnerus2000]

Development and Integration

Well... I'm not that in fond of knowing about kernel stuff and such... but this guy is not realizing that maybe is not all the fault from the Windows NT kernel but maybe other stuff that slows down the system?... He is not taking into account that Linux runs without any sort of AV protection (and that means realtime protection) just because there is no malware (or seem not to exist at least) for that OS, but if you see Windows, you see that you need an AV protection + patches + firewall + any stuff I can possibly forget so far... And that, slows down even the best OS in market...

Doesn't he realize why Windows 8 seems faster than Windows 7 in terms of processing cycles? Simple... W8 includes it's own AV software, that integrates all its features into the kernel itself...

I think, at least in my very humble oppinion, that is really unfair to say that Windows kernel is slower than others... because we are not taking into account all the things I said before...

I thought that he meant development/integration of new kernel features/improvements, not kernel performance.

He seemed to be saying that internal culture, policies and "politics" are responsible.

 

[GeneO]

I stopped reading it early on when I saw this: "We started caring about security because pre-SP3 Windows XP was an existential threat to the business"

 

[FerchogtX]

I stopped reading it early on when I saw this: "We started caring about security because pre-SP3 Windows XP was an existential threat to the business"

And once again he forgets to say that SP2 came alongside SP4 for Windows 2000 (Unless I'm mistaken) because of Blaster worm... if Windows weren't the main target for this dammed hackers, XP as well as many versions wouldn't get even one SP to begin with... better now, patches and updates would be rather small and less frecuent...

Is just not fair to compare this vs Linux and its almost zero attack rate...

 

[A Guy]

I tend to think, even if he was venting, that the issues in his first post were actual things he deals with. And then he thought better of it, and got a little scared, so backed off. I think any engineer will tell you that the scenario of politics in developing is all too common. A Guy

 

[marsmimar]

I tend to think, even if he was venting, that the issues in his first post were actual things he deals with. And then he thought better of it, and got a little scared, so backed off. I think any engineer will tell you that the scenario of politics in developing is all too common. A Guy

I think that's a spot on evaluation, Bill. No matter how talented a developer, engineer, et al, they are all marching to the beat of the drummers in upper level management.

 

[smarteyeball]

itto:

Read what is written, not what you read into it please people.

 

[jimbo45]

"I Contribute to the Windows Kernel. We Are Slower Than Other Operating Systems. Here Is Why."

I was explaining on Hacker News why Windows fell behind Linux in terms of operating system kernel performance and innovation. And out of nowhere an anonymous Microsoft developer who contributes to the Windows NT kernel wrote a fantastic and honest response acknowledging this problem and explaining its cause. His post has been deleted! Why the censorship? I am reposting it here. This is too insightful to be lost. [Edit: The anonymous poster himself deleted his post as he thought it was too cruel and did not help make his point, which is about the social dynamics of spontaneous contribution. However he let me know he does not mind the repost at the condition I redact the SHA1 hash info, which I did.] [Edit: A second statement, apologetic, has been made by the anonymous person. See update at the bottom.]

Source

A Guy

Hi there
A bit of meaningless FUD actually.
Depends on what the OS has to do, whether it's secure or not and what hardware it's running.

I have some hardware that takes maybe as much as 5 mins to warm up per session (and you can't leave this type of equipment switched on all day either) it's used so the speed of the OS itself is 100% irrelevant in this situation.

Android is a Tiny OS (although it leaks like a sieve) so it should be fairly "Fast" --there's almost NO CODE in it --same with VMWARE's ESXI although that is extremely robust.

Windows 8 for all its other problems doesn't have the label of "Slow and doddering" labelled at it.

If people are dissatisfied with the performance of Windows - it's usually because the hardware isn't sufficient -- I still see in some workplaces old Pentium machines with 512 KB RAM (yes KB) in them trying to run 4 or 5 modern apps --of course it's going to be running as slow as a stream of molasses.

I have Photoshop CS6 64 bit running on Windows 8 from an SSD on a LAPTOP - and it STARTS and is READY FOR USE in around 3 yes THREE secs -- so why should I care if the OS can shave a few microsecs of some of its processes --I'd prefer it slightly slower and 100% SECURE than fast, lean and LEAKY.

If you haven't corrupted the registry, have installed enough RAM, have a sensible processor in your computer and have DECENT DISKS - preferably an SSD then you shouldn't have complaints from a performance issue whatever version of Windows you want to run -- even poor olds VISTA.

(Or even these --scr shots enc)

Cheers
jimbo

 

[LMiller7]

I still see in some workplaces old Pentium machines with 512 KB RAM (yes KB) in them trying to run 4 or 5 modern apps

That can't be right. To run modern applications you need a relatively modern OS. Even Windows 95 had a minimum specified 4 MB RAM and that wasn't enough to run much of anything.

 

[Layback Bear]

Comparing Linux or any other operating system to Windows is dumb in my opinion.

Now if I was the Dictator of Microsoft I would have thoughts along this line.

1.They can't even give away Linux systems away in any volume that matters. To me that means it doesn't meet the needs of the mass amount of consumers in yesterdays or todays computing world. So why should we do things the way Linux does things.

2. Making changes is not a problem if they will meet the standards we use.
a. They must improve things in a meaningful way.
b. They must go through all the test for possible security problem. We are the major target of most major infectious attacks.
c. They must work well with our programs people use now and programs we have on the drawing board. People don't want to update or upgrade programs or hardware every time we have a great idea.
d. They must work well with major branded 3rd party hardware and software that people use now. Also keeping a eye on new things in the future.
e. They must be helpful where the users of our products can actually notice it. A ms here and there means nothing to the end user unless they can see it in their everyday usage of our products.

3. Making changes for the sake of change is not good enough.

4. Changes will not diminish reliability or security by any degree what so ever!!

5. Any changes to our products that will raise the cost to the customer must give value to equal amount or more and be noticeable to the customer.

6. Changes will not diminish our large share of the market we enjoy at the present.
--------------------
I seriously doubt the person who was complaining had a position that allowed him/her to analyze him/her wanted changes from all approaches.
And then their is Windows 8!

 

[jimbo45]

Hi there
Linux is fine for servers -- for "Mom and Pop" on a desktop forget it.

Windows isn't going away any time soon even if Ms disappears completely unless and until people write applications that are demonstrably SUPERIOR to photo shop / office / the literally millions of specialized applications that currently run on Windows - from Engineering apps to scientific research / lab and medical gear / music studios etc etc.

For basic surfing / email / "Farcebook" etc phones / tablets or even a chromebook is fine - you don't need a PC for this stuff.

Otherwise Windows --even in the absence of Ms will stay -- a lot of Engineering gear for example lasts over 20 - 30 years and still gets used daily -- if it's running on a stand alone PC it doesn't need updating or Internet connections or even the existence of Ms at all. XP will outlast any current version of Windows (W7 / W8) whether XP has continued support or not.

Writing better apps for non windows system obviously is a challenge -- two good ones for example The GIMP and Libre Office might be OK for casual or "beginner" users but they still don't even remotely come any where near what power or professional users of Photoshop or Ms Office expect.

If Linux (or Chrome) has to have any chance of becoming mainstream then some Windows apps need to have Linux equivalents either identical or better than the originals -- and it's just NOT HAPENNING. (I'm discussing COMMERCIAL, ROBUST applications here -- not some quite good applications a lot of hobbyists run on their machines quite successfully on Linux).

Cheers
jimbo

 

[Gary]

Linux which is based on Unix has always been faster than Windows. I have found that since I stopped using third party themes that were nothing but Eye Candy , my Windows is running a great deal faster. All I use now are some Icons and a start orb.

 

[lehnerus2000]

I still think he means "Corporate performance" and not PC OS performance (i.e. MS is not as nimble as Linux at developing/implementing kernel improvements, due to corporate policies/politics).

 

[x BlueRobot]

Does the average end user even notice any difference in kernel improvements and modifications? Probably not.