Why Devs and users should abandon Windows

[Papa6]

I've used windows for alot of years and i thought i was becoming some kind of an aware elitist but, i really wasn't. Now I've come to learn that Windows is the worst developed OS that there EVER was. I recently learned that, on or around 01/08, Microsoft will cease any and all support of the XP OS. But what I've learned from a friend who, is an IT major specializing in networking AND Security, I learned some things from him that REALLY surprised me. Let me break down what he said;

The Harddrive: Bill Gates and the bunch use some of the WORST filesystems EVER. NTFS which is supposed to be secure, is by far the worst waste of harddrive space and harddrive utilization.

Drives upto 8GB use 4Kb clusters. so expotentially, harddrive space is completely wasted.

NTFS;

My IT friend..tells me that...

For example, for a 4 GB (gigabyte) drive, the default cluster size is 4 KB (kilobytes). Note that clusters are indivisible. Even the smallest file takes up one cluster and a 4.1 KB file takes up two clusters (or 8 KB) on a 4 KB cluster system.

so... He further shows how expotentially harddrive is wasted by saying;

NTFS, on volumes of 16 gigabytes or more, uses a large cluster size for data storage; 64KB. The larger the partition, the larger the cluster size

So think of this, You write a MS word document that comes in at 6.0 KB. If you run a HARDDRIVE that is 160GB or more which, is a standard thing today, you get 64KB clusters on the drive so the harddrive can put only one thing in a cluster. so 6KB file in a 64KB cluster (64KB - 6KB=58KB) equals a 58KB waste of space! Now this is where it gets REAL ugly. Look at GRAW. Graw has 2 files for example "Context-standalone.xml" AND "context.xml" which BOTH weigh in at a small 2KB. So you have again 64KB clusters minus the 2KB for the files sizes. (so 4KB for the two files and 64KB for the cluster = 128KB for two clusters since only one file can go into a cluster. Again, 128KB(2 clusters) - 4KB(both files)= 124KB of wasted space. so you see how inefficient it is? NTFS also fragments harddrives and throws data back any old place where there's room. NTFS will read and remove data from the harddrive as it needs but, will strew the data back onto the harddrive any old place there's free space. kinda like a college student who just tosses his clothes any where there's space on the floor. Not back where the files were. My IT friend also told me that FAT32 still fragmented files but no where near what NTFS does. So what gives? NTFS was first designed and used for a business OS such as WindowsNT. NTFS was supposed to be a business OS but it wastes company IT funds because you can't get your harddrive space that you pay for due to complete uselessness and inefficiency of the filesystem. My sources have told me that the truth behind the newWINFS is , they can't get it to work. So Vista which releases next month will use this same wasteful filesystem;NTFS.

Reference: http://www.pcguide.com/ref/hdd/file/ntfs/arch_Cluster.htm

Memory

Memory is also a wasted resource in Windows as well. the more memory you insert, the more Windows will use. Also, Windows hetas up the memory because it has to work so hard doing it's job. Plus with all that work, it gets hotter and windows has very bad memory leaks or also known as memory locking because windows doesn't free up the memory is uses. if you shut program A down, then it should be removed at the time of it's shutdown.

Resource: http://techrepublic.com.com/5208-6230-0.ht...ssageID=1978753

WindowsXP

XP is yet another waste of PC resources. Right now, in my windows task manager, I have a "total" commit charge of 493344KB or about 482MB and also in my processes, Firefox browser is using a whopping 61MB. Why? Why does windows PC's have such high heat output? because the system has to work so hard. Harddrives have to work to find each and every KB of data for a program you use. think of it like this, you lose your keys and you have two areas you where you could have lost it. in your bedroom or a 4 acre plot of land. your room would take alot less time to search but goign bit by bit, how long do you think it would take to search a 4 acre plot of land? alot of other problems with the Windows OS is the kernel. the kernel is exposed. 3rd party vendors have access to the kernel and can write applications to utilize that access But with Vista they have locked up the kernel denying access. So 3rd party vendors can't have that access as before so Microsoft can thump a war drum about security and how secure Vista is.

Directx10

This will ship with Vista and WILL NOT be backwards compatible. that was the concept behind DX10. so that means that you may or may not be able to play your sims2 anymore or other games DX9 or before. But DX10 will bring in new technology like pixel shader 4.0 support and alot of graphics pipeline support that just won't work with your current hardware. this will either 1.) Alienate people 2.) Alienate these people AND force them to upgrade to hardware and software that will work with DX10/Vista or 3.)People will look at alternative OS'es. DX9 graphiccards will also NOT work with DX10 nor will XP have an opportunity to install DX10.

are you a Game developer?

then you go ahead and spend that money! with windows, it forces companies and users to buy proprietary development software (Visual Studio, compilers, database software and network development software) for hundreds of dollars where as Linux for example has compilers and software already in the OS free! So are windows game developers really about saving dollars on development? you have two distinct OS'es and one comes with tools free(no cost) and the other that makes you spend thousands upon thousands of dollars to do something that others offer for free.

Windows is also a single user OS but also has features for multiple users. But it has alot of services that come turned on standard and that's where the problems of windows security come into play. Windows will NEVER be secure.

But what i see with the release of Vista is going to be a major shift in user migration. I see people looking towards Linux or OSX or some other OS because there's an issue with Vista product activation. The enterprise or corporate sector is in complete upheavel over MS's system for activation that last word I heard is that they are "rethinking" the activation system. Plus alot of corporations don't like the fact that this new OS, Vista, might not run on most of their current hardware. Mind you, corporations are MS's best and largest money maker alone. the casual home user isn't a big concern to MS. But with Vista I don't think it's at all impossible to think businesses won't move to another OS aside from the cost of migration and training. But that's the price of running one OS for so long. that's what the world has done for so many years. Running only windows and creating a highly Mono systemic culture with Windows. But I'm sure that MS will bite the big bullet as Vista looks to force everyone to buy new systems and new software that WILL run on it that most might not move to it soon, if ever.

But microsoft is banking on the fact that they think or assume everyone will migrate to Vista upon release. Some just might. those who have no clue as to what's going on will assume windows is so great.

But I think if people would look into just how aweful Windows is, then MS would be really blown away.

[firefly2442]

http://www.ubuntulinux.org

I'm a Linux fanboy myself. As for the hard drive format NTFS, it's not a journaled file system like many of the popular Linux file systems. I would agree with the memory problems. I have an old 200 Mhz machine w/128 RAM which runs Linux fine. I wouldn't even think of trying Windows XP on it. As for DX10, I'm not sure about that one. I've heard that it is backwards compliant.... dunno. I haven't read much into it so I don't know for sure.

[ROCO*AFZ*]

Directx10

This will ship with Vista and WILL NOT be backwards compatible. that was the concept behind DX10. so that means that you may or may not be able to play your sims2 anymore or other games DX9 or before. But DX10 will bring in new technology like pixel shader 4.0 support and alot of graphics pipeline support that just won't work with your current hardware. this will either 1.) Alienate people 2.) Alienate these people AND force them to upgrade to hardware and software that will work with DX10/Vista or 3.)People will look at alternative OS'es. DX9 graphiccards will also NOT work with DX10 nor will XP have an opportunity to install DX10

Incorrect. Vista will be able to run DX9 games. Ask anyone here running a release version and GRAW. It works.

It is rumored though it is through a software layer and may not perform as good as DX10

The kicker is... Windows XP will not be able to run DirectX10 games as of now.

[Papa6]

Roco you base that off the betas not the RTM MS said DX10 will not be backwards compatible. they are stopping backwards compatibility

Ask anyone here running a release version and GRAW. It works.

DX9 came with the betas as dx10 wasn't even done.

Edited December 14, 2006 by Papa6

[ROCO*AFZ*]

LOL... who says i have a beta. i work for an OEM.

We get the full edition with our Microsoft Action pack and MSDN subscriptions.

[Dannik]

Yes, DX10 will not be backwards compatible with DX9 and earlier. It does, though, ship with an emulation layer that will enable full DX9 compatibility.

In other words, despite not being backwards compatible, DX10 is backwards compatible.

[Papa6]

LOL... who says i have a beta. i work for an OEM.

We get the full edition with our Microsoft Action pack and MSDN subscriptions.

BCZ Vista ships with DX10 and MS has said it will NOT work with DX9 hardware. that's why they are pushing the vista upgrade tool so folks can see what needs to be upgraded. ROCO i 'd expect a fella like you who works for an OEM to know that.

[ROCO*AFZ*]

Yes, DX10 will not be backwards compatible with DX9 and earlier. It does, though, ship with an emulation layer that will enable full DX9 compatibility.

In other words, despite not being backwards compatible, DX10 is backwards compatible.

Correct dannik... it's a software mode.. that is not quite directx but does however run the game. A better wording would be VISTA is backwards compatible with DX9 games.

[Papa6]

Yes, DX10 will not be backwards compatible with DX9 and earlier. It does, though, ship with an emulation layer that will enable full DX9 compatibility.

In other words, despite not being backwards compatible, DX10 is backwards compatible.

Hey dannik what's up? anyway, EWEEK magazine has stated that Microsoft has commented that DX9 hardware won't work with DX10 Vista. Vista is MS's first stand that backwards compatibility is over. DX10 takes the work off the CPU and that was alimit of earlier DX versions.

But MS has stated clearly that DX9 will not be compatible. period.

[Dannik]

Yeah, DX10 specific software won't work with DX9 hardware, but Vista ships with both DX10 and DX9L (aka DX9c under XP) available. Your DX9 hardware will function just fine under Vista, but you will need DX10 hardware to use DX10 software, and your DX10 hardware will run DX9 software just fine.

[ROCO*AFZ*]

Also note, whenever a new directx is release, they drop support on the previous. Currently directx 7 or 8 is not supported by MS... as 9 is released. same will be with 10. I think that leads to some of the confusion.

Also people thought directx9l which dannik mentions would be a downloadable directx10 for windows xp.. this rumor is also incorrect.

[Papa6]

This is a article that even though it's from july, Vista was confirmed DX10 only.

[ROCO*AFZ*]

Also note, whenever a new directx is release, they drop support on the previous. Currently directx 7 or 8 is not supported by MS... as 9 is released. same will be with 10. I think that leads to some of the confusion.

Also people thought directx9l which dannik mentions would be a downloadable directx10 for windows xp.. this rumor is also incorrect.

Here is an example of one news correcting there mistake..... you have to be careful of rumors.

http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=35140

[Papa6]

The D3D10 API was designed around the new driver model in Vista. In addition, Aero Glass runs on DX9.0L. Aero Glass is one of the main reasons DX9.0L exists on Vista.

your article says this for "Aero-glass" added: the GUI

Edited December 14, 2006 by Papa6

[ROCO*AFZ*]

The D3D10 API was designed around the new driver model in Vista. In addition, Aero Glass runs on DX9.0L. Aero Glass is one of the main reasons DX9.0L exists on Vista.

your article says this for "Aero-glass" added: the GUI

Also note...

DX9.0L is a special version of DirectX 9 for Vista only that allows DX9 games to run with Vista's new driver model. It's not possible to run D3D10 on XP without running in pure software emulation.

and the final word from microsoft themselves...

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsvista/community/gaming.mspx

here is a direct quote from above

Note that DirectX 10 won't be compatible with earlier DirectX versions, and it won't be released for Windows XP. For backward compatibility with current games and hardware, Microsoft plans to include DirectX 9L in Windows Vista.

as stated.

[Papa6]

so DX9 will be for legacy games right? then DX10 will in fact NOT be compatible as they must ship this DX9.0L. so in a sense we are both correct. DX10 won't be compatible with DX9 games, but it appears that DX9.0L will be included for the Aero-Glass GUI and DirectX9 games. so basically I'm guessing that you'll have two DX's installed but have nothing to do with each other. so it makes no sense to bring a DX9 vid card over because DX9 cards won't be supported for the future as DX10 will move forward. so what good will it do you to run the DX9.0L then?

[ROCO*AFZ*]

so DX9 will be for legacy games right? then DX10 will in fact NOT be compatible as they must ship this DX9.0L. so in a sense we are both correct. DX10 won't be compatible with DX9 games, but it appears that DX9.0L will be included for the Aero-Glass GUI and DirectX9 games. so basically I'm guessing that you'll have two DX's installed but have nothing to do with each other. so it makes no sense to bring a DX9 vid card over because DX9 cards won't be supported for the future as DX10 will move forward. so what good will it do you to run the DX9.0L then?

Now you got it.

See why there is confusion... 9.0L is for your current games(what you play now). So when you go to vista in march you can run them.

For a bit you will see games that are DX10 and DX9 i bet. That also means you can run persay GR1 on Vista with a dx10 or 9 card. it's the new games that will be the problem. DX10 games if they don't also support DX9 won't work in xp so xp will be fading away for gamers. Kinda like when a new console comes out. Sure they make a game for 360, and xbox... but xbox 360 is way better looking and performing. Eventually they will only make them for the 360.

On a brighter note, i didn't realize 9.0L was somewhat hardware. Everyone has been saying software compaibility maybe and i didn't notice on our demo machine. (as i only had a small chance so far to test games as we do business pc's and we have only had it a few days)

[CrowmanUK]

Sod this for a lark then I'm gonna get me a Nintendo DS

[ROCO*AFZ*]

bah... commodore rules ...airbourne rangers here i come;)

[CrowmanUK]

How about a couple of sessions of Uridium on the amiga, I'll let you go first

[Papa6]

What gets me is if Devs are so concerned with the costs of development and what not, why do they develop for a proprietary OS and buy that Companies development tools at outrageous licensing prices?

I'm becoming anti-MS in that they offer software that cost so much that how to Devs make money or a profit in the end? but i see why devs are going console. consoles have a set hardware config and that means easier and quicker development times and alleviate the costs associated with supporting games with patches.

GR took 3 years to build from what i understand. but it too had issues but they got fixed in 3 patches. games these days can only aspire to have such fortune.

But I like Linux because the tools are free!

[ROCO*AFZ*]

Yes papa, but no hardly anyone develops linux games (wine isn't very good at it)

And most PC users (note users not gamers) are not capable of loading it or have the understanding. There are also bad things to opensource as a project might be busy and supported well and gone the next due to FREE no funding.

I like linux to a degree don't get me wrong, but it's place still is not on the desktop.

And good versions such as Suse are no longer free unless you use an old version as now Novell owns them and makes you pay royalty

In a business sense also ... Red hat costs money. it has to be licensed for businesses to use.

The time involved retraining users and dealing with incompatibilities with software makes it cost more in the short term then most businesses are willing to spend.

Here is red hats legal pricing

https://www.redhat.com/apps/commerce/

For commercial.

[Papa6]

I just came across these articles

the first Here

The second Here

and here's where I feel MS is ripping off the users with broken promises. alot of what was going to be in the OS was stopped. WINFS is the biggest I remember see

Here

[ROCO*AFZ*]

I just came across these articles

the first Here

The second Here

and here's where I feel MS is ripping off the users with broken promises. alot of what was going to be in the OS was stopped. WINFS is the biggest I remember see

Here

For the last one read this... it's a november article by the same guy (yours was of an older build in april)

http://www.winsupersite.com/vista/

the theory on winfs performance is wrong also...

http://blogs.msdn.com/winfs/

The above if from the winfs team. Note winfs not in vista was announced in 2004.

As for piracy. I bet windows would be a whole lot cheaper if people didn't spend the time copying it. Good for microsoft in reclaiming the buck. The more Gates makes, the more that gets donated to education health and kids. (check this google search http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Bill+gates+donates ). He isn't the money hungry person everyone says he is.

Linux did make the desktop. Anyone remember Lindows that was sold at Wallmart. It failed horribly. It was touted to run like windows and have everything you needed. I think it was there for like 4 months before scrapped

I can tell you this also as working for local oem that covers many businesses and schools in this area.

Linux has a way to go before it will be accepted for more then webserving.

1% of our sales is PC/Servers for a linux build (usually) red hat. Usually it's for red hat as some proprietary database programs (one for a huge warehousing company comes to mind) require it. Needless to say they ditched it because red hat licensing was more than an sql server model and easier for staff to learn in house)

The rest is usually (this is our sales per O/S) 20% Windows 2003 another 30% Small business server 2003 (MS did good for small busineses as it has exchange, sharepoint, server bundled, outlook webmail, and outlook 2003 for all clients for around 700$ with 5 cals) and the other 49% is windows XP.

[Papa6]

i realize the way you fell Roco. You make a living working for a certified OEM. But Vista is three years late because they couldn't get WinFS to work among other things. that's ding one against Bill. The WinFS was the single most noted feature that was hyped and alot of discussion went into how WinFS was going to revolutionize the whole windows experience. That was supposed to speed up the use of the searches and music libraries etc.gone

Aero Glass. Now to my knowledge, Windows Vista full version will be in the ball park of $400 and something close to $299 for the upgrade. I remember in the early stages of longhorn that, there was going to be a 3D desktop and it was going to change the whole experience for the user. gone.

the list goes on but i have to ask the question, is the final product worthy of not only the hype but the high price tag?

The Piracy aspect of Vista is because MS is considered an evil empire. But it's an enclosed locked up OS. The open software community allows for one to even buy a boxed OS with the manual and you can copy the CD's and give it to as many people as you want. open source allows for access to the kernel whereas MS locks it up. open source is available to all as is the OS system code. if there's a bug in the software, the ability for someone to fix the code immediately and post it freely for everyone.

I guess one can use the titanic as MS's Windows and hackers want to sink it. it's a closed system. Alot of people may say that MS is just making money. true. but why should folks pay top dollar for an OS that takes what seems forever to fix? The pricing doesn't seem to suggest MS wants to bring computing to the masses.

Every thing that is on top falls. no matter who or what it is. Vista I predict will be "THE" downfall or the hard start of MS's downfall. I don't think people will be willing as MS is predicting to rush out and buy the Vista OS. Gamers will because they will need to move up to the DX10 for future gaming.

This will be a great show.