3 ms·

Kinda garbage article offering nothing. Is Windows NT kernel really so bad?

techntoke 7y ago
Yes, the registry is terrible and Windows applications basically do whatever they want. Once you install a few applications and then try removing them you'll end up with a ton of junk left over. Dot files and standard /etc config files are a blessing. Linux package managers are orders of magnitude faster than chocolatey, which isn't part of the OS. Windows Updates are notoriously bad.
- dagw 7y ago
  None of which has anything to do with the kernel.
- srbby 7y ago
  Registry adds some features over text files: https://devblogs.microsoft.com/oldnewthing/20071126-00/?p=24383 https://devblogs.microsoft.com/oldnewthing/20071126-00/?p=24...
AstralStorm 7y ago
It is designed for a simpler age and has not caught up. Lots of overhead for multitasking and multithreading (esp. creation), bad handling of NUMA, no actual handling of asymmetric processors (big LITTLE, per unit clock scaling). No way to enforce CPU limits per task. Expensive locking primitives with no handling of priority inversion. And more...
- mehrdadn 7y ago
  > no handling of priority inversion Uh... huh? "The scheduler solves this problem by randomly boosting the priority of the ready threads (in this case, the low priority lock-holders). The low priority threads run long enough to exit the critical section, and the high-priority thread can enter the critical section. If the low-priority thread does not get enough CPU time to exit the critical section the first time, it will get another chance during the next round of scheduling." https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/procthread/priority-inversion https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/procthread/pr... > Expensive locking primitives Elaborate/citation? > It is designed for a simpler age and has not caught up. A little ironic to read something like this when, say, unlike in Linux, their I/O system was designed to be asynchronous from the ground-up. Or when so much of Windows is so insanely extensible at so many points that I can't even begin to list them all (just consider how they literally implemented a Linux subsystem on top). Or when Linux literally just discovered the concept of waiting for a process to exit a few months ago.
fuu_dev 7y ago
The NT kernel is quite good. The reality is that there are not a lot of ppl with knowlage of the kernel and linux enthusiasts often tends to have a very baised opinion towards windows.

Yes, the registry is terrible and Windows applications basically do whatever they want. Once you install a few applications and then try removing them you'll end up with a ton of junk left over. Dot files and standard /etc config files are a blessing. Linux package managers are orders of magnitude faster than chocolatey, which isn't part of the OS. Windows Updates are notoriously bad.

dagw 7y ago
None of which has anything to do with the kernel.
srbby 7y ago
Registry adds some features over text files: https://devblogs.microsoft.com/oldnewthing/20071126-00/?p=24383 https://devblogs.microsoft.com/oldnewthing/20071126-00/?p=24...

AstralStorm 7y ago

It is designed for a simpler age and has not caught up. Lots of overhead for multitasking and multithreading (esp. creation), bad handling of NUMA, no actual handling of asymmetric processors (big LITTLE, per unit clock scaling). No way to enforce CPU limits per task. Expensive locking primitives with no handling of priority inversion. And more...

mehrdadn 7y ago
> no handling of priority inversion Uh... huh? "The scheduler solves this problem by randomly boosting the priority of the ready threads (in this case, the low priority lock-holders). The low priority threads run long enough to exit the critical section, and the high-priority thread can enter the critical section. If the low-priority thread does not get enough CPU time to exit the critical section the first time, it will get another chance during the next round of scheduling." https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/procthread/priority-inversion https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/procthread/pr... > Expensive locking primitives Elaborate/citation? > It is designed for a simpler age and has not caught up. A little ironic to read something like this when, say, unlike in Linux, their I/O system was designed to be asynchronous from the ground-up. Or when so much of Windows is so insanely extensible at so many points that I can't even begin to list them all (just consider how they literally implemented a Linux subsystem on top). Or when Linux literally just discovered the concept of waiting for a process to exit a few months ago.

fuu_dev 7y ago

The NT kernel is quite good. The reality is that there are not a lot of ppl with knowlage of the kernel and linux enthusiasts often tends to have a very baised opinion towards windows.