4 ms·

Actually, MSFT has pushed Windows Server on supercomputers a few times, as well as for other latency critical applications like the London Stock Exchange. Each

Actually, MSFT has pushed Windows Server on supercomputers a few times, as well as for other latency critical applications like the London Stock Exchange. Each time they've ended up with egg on their faces for technical reasons, i.e. Linux consistently outperforms Windows Server both on speed and reliability for these workloads. Example: http://www.computerworld.com/article/2467082/data-center/london-stock-exchange-to-abandon-failed-windows-platform.html http://www.computerworld.com/article/2467082/data-center/lon...

SEJeff 10y ago
Right, you're simply providing reasons that agree with me! I work as a tech guy (linux wrangler / code monkey) for a finance firm. I worked in finance during the meltdown of LSE and the new linux based "Millennium" platform. I agree with you that Linux consistently is higher throughput AND lower latency, but that is my point. Windows isn't on supercomputers because it isn't a great fit and there isn't much of a market for it. Ditto can be said for Linux on the Desktop. * This message brought to you from my RHEL7 work workstation running GNOME 3 and Chrome :D