What's wrong with Windows?

< Next Topic | Back to topic list | Previous Topic >

Posted by Cassius
Aug 10, 2010 at 01:19 AM

Mainly the Registry.

Also backward compatibility is sometimes a problem. For example, GoBack.

Also, anyone who has used GoBack in Advanced Mode knows that Windows seems to open a great many files to run even a relatively simple application and then usually saves them, rather than just closing them. Seems like a lot of wasted CPU and disk churning to me.

Posted by Alexander Deliyannis
Aug 15, 2010 at 06:43 PM

I have little understanding of the inner workings of Windows to express an educated opinion, but as a user I have the following story to share.

More than a year ago I started experimenting with Linux. There are still rough edges that make that operating system problematic for newcomers. However, overall the experience has been very positive and it is only the non-availability of many applications discussed here that has impeded me from making the full switch.

In particular regarding performance, it has been a revelation to find cross-platform applications running much faster in Linux, even though the netbook I’m using is of significantly lower specifications than my Windows notebook.

Of course my Linux installation is much cleaner than my Windows one. But this too is related to the system philosophy: you don’t need a disk defragmenter running in the background because the Linux file system is self-defragmenting. The system firewall is very capable, the package manager takes care of library dependencies so you don’t get double and triple copies of the same DLLs etc.

I’m now trying out Windows 7 64bit in a new laptop; I don’t expect a revelation there, I just hope that it will remain stable and capable for 3-4 years from today.

Posted by dan7000
Aug 15, 2010 at 11:42 PM

One big difference between most Windows machines and most non-Windows machines: virus checkers. Most people have a virus scan running in the background all the time on Windows, but not on other OS’s. Depending on the anti-virus application, this can seriously slow down your system.

Based on personal experience, symantec / norton antivirus is the worst in this respect. When I was managing software development projects we discovered that build times were three times as long with NAV running. Unfortunately, symantec has conned a lot of businesses into requiring NAV on all machines, thus seriously harming the productivity of the whole country

As someone else noticed, Windows apps open a lot of files. Imagine how much extra time it takes if every time you open any file, that file is first checked to see if its signature matches any one of a hundred thousand virus signatures. Ugh.

There are lots of websites that test this stuff. Here’s an example: http://reviews.cnet.com/1990-6600_7-6655968-1.html
You can see that it adds approximately 30% to the time of any task if you are running NAV. The worst programs nearly double the time of many tasks. Even the best (Kapersky in this test) has a substantial (5-10%) impact.

Posted by Cassius
Aug 16, 2010 at 12:29 AM

Dan 7000,

I run Kaspersky Internet Security. It also slows things down, but if I need more speed, I first shut down my internet connection and then have Kaspersky run a full scan on my computer, which can take a couple of hours.

Then as long as I am not connected to an outside source, I do not need to run the anti-virus/firewall. When I want to connect to the “outside world,” I turn Kaspersky on first and then reenable my modem.

Posted by dan7000
Aug 16, 2010 at 02:58 AM

Cassius,

I do a similar thing on my personal computer, which runs Panda Antivirus. Panda is cool: fast and free - I recommend it. But like all antivirus, it slows things down.

The bizarre thing about this—to the point of the thread—is that we tolerate going through these contortions just to keep our Windows machines running.

Back to topic list