"I Contribute to the Windows Kernel. We Are Slower Than Other Operating Systems.

"I Contribute to the Windows Kernel. We Are Slower Than Other Operating Systems. Here Is Why."

http://blog.zorinaq.com/?e=74

I'm curious to see how people feel about this.

 

After reading, I felt he was wrong in many ways. Surprisingly, he made a second statement correcting himself. Still not sure if he is telling the truth about his supposed work at Microsoft ... anyways, the second comment is much better:

 

His second comment is more an apology for being so rude about it. Nothing he says in the first place has really changed much.

It's just interesting to note that he feels MS's development is hindered by their financial motivation, whereas with Linux you get praise for the slightest achievement, and people work just because they love to work.

And companies like Google are getting all of the smart people and MS has to pick up the dregs.

At one point he had hashes up that were verifiable by people int he company, and no one has spoken out and said "Hey, you're not a MS employee", so I think he's likely legit.

 

Nothing he said was proved (as he admitted later on). He provided a simple rant with lots of subjective remarks, not an extensive analysis supported by a fair amount of data etc. I wouldn't make conclusions of a rant, let alone agree with that.

 

It's not supposed to be some whitepaper with an abstract, proof, and conclusion. It's a note on how they see development first hand - the motivation is stifling the projects and the company.

This is not something to be "proved" or "disproved" it is always one persons subjective account of the company that he or she works at.

Their second post is not recanting what he stated previously, only that they put it too bluntly. They take back virtually nothing of importance in the second post.

 

There is no real importance in what he said IMO. The second statement is basically an admission of humility, limitation and short sight.

 

I think you're focusing too much on his second post, which is basically saying "This was more popular than I expected, and I was too mean" - not "What I said above isn't true".

If that's how you want to take it I won't try to convince you otherwise. To me, having someone within Microsoft point out all of these issues, is something to take seriously.

 

Microsoft is a common "target" of antipathy, so I don't take any rants about MS seriously.

A signed, extensive analysis supported by a fair amount of data would be something to take seriously IMO.

 

Believe what you like. Your way off base with the antipathy argument considering the source, but it doesn't matter to me.

 

It's one dude on the freaking net venting about flaws he sees in development that he takes part in, what the hell do you want? If he names himself, don't you think that might, you know, cause an issue with employment? This wasn't a Wilders flame thread, it was a post by a guy who works at your beloved MS. He talked about a few things above his pay grade, so he dialed it back in a follow-up post, but the rest of his "rant" is still valid. There was no "oops, got busted, better act clueless and just angry". You just detest any anti-MS arguments or anything that interferes with your "facts". There's really no way for you to deny that.

Regardless, it's your right to believe whatever you please. But to ask for some sort of major research paper or long study from one guy voicing his concern over development he's involved with is a little silly.

 

I'm not asking a research paper from him. And, his second statement pretty much cleared his own mistakes.

I'm just saying that I'm not going to take everything he said in his first statement/rant seriously.

And, I'm also telling what exactly I take seriously.

As for your reactions, my skeptic position (especially about criticism on Microsoft) surely seems to hurt some feelings, lol.

 

No hurt feelings here, just putting it out there how you make yourself look really. Anyway, there's not much to really argue about with this guy, considering it's a single view/opinion from a single dev in a company chock full of them. Heck Wild, for all anyone knows, we're both being played and this guy hasn't seen the inside of a Redmond office a day in his life. Given enough Googling, anyone can sound legitimate enough to anyone not directly involved in whatever situation. I don't think he should be dismissed so easily, but you know, you're right, it shouldn't be taken to heart either. There are some good points in his "rant" though. I don't expect any hard data to come from this though, lol.

And you're still a Microsoft lackey

 

So you do take some of it serious? If so, what exactly.
Even while you doubt whether he actually works at Microsoft and write it's only 'a simple rant with lots of subjective remarks'?
I guess you don't take a single letter serious from the fp.

And defend Microsoft full frontal as much as you like and as long as you want. There's much nonsense being told about them so I guess it's ok to have someone manning the gate, ever vigilant and ever-ready at the cannons, if only to offer some counter balance.

 

It's an account of what an employee sees and what he/she expects. It's common in any company. Some will see more of the good while some will see more of the bad.

It's being highlighted because it involves MS. That's all.

That makes more people know of it compared to another person who works in a company and sharing thoughts among his/her own colleagues or wife/husband.

Since none of us here works in MS, take it with a grain of salt and appreciate the insight (even it's non-verifiable). It's just another opinion.

 

Really, are you sure about that?

 

LOL.

I know that it has been suggested before that Wild Hunter is 'working for MS' or something to that degree but I disagree. People can be passionate and agreeable to something but that doesn't mean one works for the company. Questioning someone's affiliation is reasonable (necessary at times) but sometimes abuse it simply because they disagree with the person.

 

For all the ranting and nonsense I must say the NT kernel doesn't appear to be suffering whatsoever. 6.2 [Windows 8] has had major improvements and additions, even more so in Windows 8.1

 

FYI, the anonymous source may be bogus.

Anyway, as I've said ad infinitem elsewhere, the real performance issues on the desktop are mostly in the desktop stack.

 

Interestingly, he disagress with the terminology, and is subsequently corrected.

I think they're just insulted, honestly. I don't think people should be going "Oh, well windows isn't slow" or whatever. Just that the motivations for Microsoft employees are different.

And anyone who's a CS student right now knows that Google's making the good offers. A friend went from Microsoft to Google and doubled his paycheck, plus the offer was just better because he wanted Google more.

 

Hah. Google has Ray Kurzweil on their payroll now, for whatever that might be worth... (Not much, I should hope.)

Anyway I am aware that Linux routinely bests Windows in server benchmarks, but there are different kinds of "slow."

 

Sounds like it was written around Vista era, in terms of comments about preformance.

I have heard these stories about how development happens before before on the internet and I know numerous people including one of my best friends who work at MS for a long time who have told me similar stories about barriers put up around teams and roles.
Yes they exist, but how much of an effect they have on the end product, I honestly don't know.

Cheers, Nick

 

Sounds like an employee of any big company.
The grass is always greener everywhere else, but that's expected.
Mediocrity leads, that's how it always works. Simple.
Mrk

 

Spot on, lol.