Forum

Quoted from CrashSite

I have literally no idea what half those points mean, but I get the feeling Windows just got owned as well as some other people.

i got a feeling that nobody cares

Quoted from Skyride

[…]

1) It has a terrible scheduler.
2) Its method of dealing with file systems quickly becomes incredibly untidy as the number of volumes increase.
3) By its nature, it tempts many developers to use an unnecessary number of daemons which sit wasting resources.
4) The user/security systems are designed at higher levels as an after thought rather than right from the core which makes it inherently insecure.
5) The graphical output system is tied directly to the kernel.
6) It has an extremely limited shell.
7) It has very little in the way of remote access capability.
8) Newer versions use a signed driver system which is a potential run-in to making it refuse to run on non-certified hardware (i.e. the hardware providers would need to pay Microsoft silly amounts of money).
9) It doesn’t use memory as efficiently as it really should.
10) The I/O scheduler is terrible (the crux of the problem with long boot times).
11) It has no package management.

1) What’s wrong with Windows scheduler?
2) You argument is terribly emotional and the matter of having your stored-on-multiple-partitions filesystem represented as a forest or tree isn’t so important.
3) Daemons by the definition don’t “sit wasting resources”, daemons sleep most of the time and wake only when some event happens ie. there’s new tcp connection or it’s time to run scheduler task. Nothing in nature of Microsoft operating systems “tempts many developers to use an unnecessary number of daemons”.
4) Windows security track record is shit, though I don’t think you actually understand what you are talking about. Neither Linux nor Windows really cares about security at the lowest level. Windows has aforementioned shit security track record and Linus isn’t all that ecstatic about it, deliberately not mentioning fixed vulnerabilities in changelogs and calling security people and their work “security circus”. If you want actually secured and hardened Linux distribution you should use one of software packages implementing mandatory access control mechanism like SELinux or AppArmor. The security of open-source operating systems doesn’t come from some magical security pixie dust in the kernel but from the excellent development model encouraging people to read the code and find vulnerabilities. “Given enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow”. Alaternatively you can use OpenBSD, they are *very* serious about security.
5) Since Vista it is not.
6) That’s simply untrue, there’s Powershell. You can alternatively install cygwin like most people do.
7) RDP is installed and enabled on every Microsoft OS since forever.
8) Why would Microsoft block hardware makers from writing drivers for their OS? That makes no sense. This process is in place so unauthorized users don’t install random drivers from teh internets. That actually have been a serious problem in older editions of Windows, where buggy drivers accounted for majority of blue screens. There’s no better solution, the same principle is used in every Unix package manager. Linux has similar problem with proprietary binary kernel modules (though they opted for different solutions, which makes more sense in their case – they mark kernels as tainted).
9) Examples of such inefficient memory usage?
10) On my machines both Windows and Linux boot times are long and it’s more of a problem of starting unneeded crap, low levels of parallelization and inefficient boot scripts, problems that are supposedly solved by more modern init systems like systemd or upstart. I don’t even know that much about Windows boot-up process but I’m quite sure I/O scheduler isn’t the problem here.
11) It has one – it’s called Windows Installer, you must’ve encountered .msi files, those are packages for their packaging system. The problem with Windows packaging system is that it lacks support for dependencies and remote repositories that Linux alternatives provide. Oh and good tooling – yum and apt-get are indispensable. From what i know Microsoft works on improving situation (mainly for open source apps) with the coapp project – http://coapp.org/ .

Quoted from Spike Himself

..why do people even bother defending windows when it is so obviously flawed?

Because every attacker has to add that sentence at the end and every defender knows Linux has its flaws too.

Vicious circle you fall into, all of you.

Look sorry, but I’m not going to get involved in a pointless windows vs linux argument with some random windows server admin who thinks powershell is even remotely comparable, nevermind a full alternative to bash.

also windows hardware drivers are easy as abc

not the like with linux where its impossible to find ones on new ( core i series ) hardware

Quoted from Spike Himself

What’s the windows equivalent? Oh I see..

What part of “shit security track record” is so hard to understand? I never claimed there is hardening solution for Windows. I claimed that “security designed from the core” doesn’t happen in Linux either – if of course we assume that by core skyride means the Linux kernel and is not just parroting some random slogans.

Quoted from Spike Himself

Powershell is a joke. If you seriously consider that powerful I doubt you’ve actually done any scripting ever.

How wrong you are, I actually done some scripting on bash + coreutils, but never used Powershell, just that I heard very good things about it. Hey, explain my why Powershell is so inferior? I’m interested in the topic. Too bad you won’t do that. Also, touching the cygwin point – what’s wrong with installing bash + gnu command lines tools on Windows? You might be shocked to discover but they are not exclusive to Linux. Bash is a default shell in OSX and *BSDs, also cygwin isn’t an emulator but rather an implementation of POSIX environment in Windows (mainly translation POSIX -> Windows system calls really). I see nothing wrong with installing that in my windows environment. Do I break some religious taboo?

Quoted from Spike Himself

That’s not a package manager, really. When you install an MSI ‘package’, what is going to be responsible for deinstallation? MSI or the program written by the developer of the software in question? :)
Install: 400 files – Uninstall: 350 files. Ohh!

Um, you are wrong. Windows Installer is responsible for deinstallation of MSI package and does just that. MSI is a package format just like .rpm or .deb, that means it’s generally files + metadata instructing packager how to install/uninstall them. If you really weant, you can most likely handle uninstallation with your own scripts/app just like some .deb/.rpm packages for proprietary software do (last time i checked Crossweavers did just that).

Quoted from Skyride

I’m not going to get involved in a pointless windows vs linux argument with some random windows server admin

Wait, what? I’m not a windows server admin and even if I were, then what? That would’ve made me wrong by default? Pretty cool reasoning there.

Sorry guys to interrupt your thread, I won’t do this again, you can now go back to your regularly scheduled ignorance and hate.

I love religious wars!

waize, to answer your question, even tho it’s too late, since you’re using nvidia you have to check if you have the correct drivers installed in xorg (google ubuntu nvidia drivers, you’ll get lots of tutorials). As a hint, try measuring performance with glxgears with each driver you try to check which one is the fastest.

I used to run steam/tf2 on wine and then switched to Transgaming Cedega which is basically the same, but made entirely for games, and I hit 100 fps on my nvidia gf 8800 which amazed me (and made me sad because windows didn’t even get near 60fps with this card).

Good luck.

edit: I ran tf2 on debian, there was no _buntu back then :P