Over at PC world they have an article about what they describe as the ‘killer’ feature of Windows 7. I read with interest on their test methodology and the conclusions that were made after the testing was complete. I also gave some thought to what they reported and wanted to see what others thought.
In their report they stated the following:
Given the same number of CPU cores, Windows 7 runs circles around both Windows Vista and Windows XP. In fact, the results aren’t even close: In one multiprocess workflow test, Windows 7 outpaced Windows XP by 250 percent — this on an eight-core (dual quad-core Xeon) HP Z800 workstation.
This is Windows 7’s killer feature. It means that, as customers invest in new PC hardware, they’ll be better positioned to reap the improvements in CPU, memory, and chip set performance by deploying Windows 7. It also means that sticking with Windows XP — ostensibly because it is less bloated and performs better — is a fool’s errand.
I found this statement odd when I thought about how this would have any affect on consumers and their home computer systems:
In one multiprocess workflow test, Windows 7 outpaced Windows XP by 250 percent — this on an eight-core (dual quad-core Xeon) HP Z800 workstation.
Is there anyone running this type of configuration on a desktop or laptop system? I know the answer is no, but I thought I would ask anyway. To me twin quads Xeons are in the server league of systems. I seriously doubt that such a system would be running Windows 7. What do you think?
It also means that sticking with Windows XP — ostensibly because it is less bloated and performs better — is a fool’s errand.
A fool’s errand? Who wrote this article, Steve Ballmer? Calling anyone who still uses Windows XP a ‘fool’ is rude. I still have two computers in my home that both run Windows XP just fine. I realize that neither are able to run Windows 7, but they still work on a daily basis without incident.
What do you think?