Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Did Windows 10 slow down with each feature update?

ntdotdev.wordpress.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 432 posts

Re: Did Windows 10 slow down with each feature update?

#321

Post by hnick »

rasz wrote: post #250
toast0 wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep. Windows 7 would sometimes take a few minutes to finish whatever boot time disk i/o it wanted to do; for Windows 10 on a disk, it seemed to always be doing some i/o and never settled down.

Win10 is logging and tracelogging >100 separate useless things, just in case mothership would want to request them uploaded for telemetry purposes.

Every time I open Event Viewer I'm amazed at how many things are in there, and how exactly zero help with the problem I'm having.

Re: Did Windows 10 slow down with each feature update?

#322

Post by darkfirefly »

yyyk wrote: post #314
boba7 wrote: post #5

Anyone finally willing to admit that w10 is unusable on Hard Drives while Linux and W7 work fine on them?

I don't have experience with W10+HDD, but note that modern HDDs have started to adopt SMR which can lead to slower writes. It's possible slowness comes from that direction and not just W10.

Not sure how modern you are referring too, but I have 2009-era hard drives which are very sluggish.

Re: Did Windows 10 slow down with each feature update?

#325

Post by cheschire »

Wowfunhappy wrote: post #249
qzw wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An incredibly low probability multiplied by ~billion+ users means somebody is going to lose something valuable sooner or later. And then the odds of MS getting sued for “not even patching a well-known vulnerability” becomes 100%.

But that's also a billion+ users with much slower computers! So you need to compare the harm on both sides. And then MS could add a switch in Settings for anyone who is concerned. (I realize not many people would find it, but it seems important for the option to be accessible, without digging into the registry or some such.)

There's already third party tools (0) to disable those mitigations in windows. I suspect the small barrier to entry of needing to use a search engine is enough to keep the risk minimized to the general population. Hopefully only people who are knowledgeable of and willing to accept the risk use this.

0: https://www.grc.com/inspectre.htm

Re: Did Windows 10 slow down with each feature update?

#327

Post by cheschire »

ksec wrote: post #261
samplatt wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>almost innavigable for someone with quick reflexes My few short years with Windows 3.1+ spoiled me for all future versions of windows. Instant closing, instant alt-tabbing, double-clicking the top-left corner icon to close, (nearly) instant opening of simple apps like File Manager and Notepad... not to mention the instant crashes. Linux got close but still always felt clunky, while future versions of Windows and Mac…

That is what I have been banging on about for years . Latency added, not just in Software, but in Hardware as well from Display, Keyboard, Mouse and even Network. The past 20+ years the whole industry nearly went all out on optimising for throughput. Sometimes I look at macOS, Windows 10. Apart from some UI facelift I dont even remember a single user feature that was relevant or important in the past 5 years. Apart f…

"Finally" seems a bit myopic. The war against latency has been going on continuously since the beginning, even in gaming. Check out nearly any content John Carmack has ever written or spoken on the topic of gaming or VR, just as one example.

Re: Did Windows 10 slow down with each feature update?

#328

Post by josephg »

Wowfunhappy wrote: post #236
sharms wrote: post #146

Disappointed I didn't see fairly reasonable explanations around processor security bugs which impact broad system performance such as Spectre and Meltdown. This has a significant impact on Linux and Microsoft has even outlined that these fixes impact their performance (there have been many more security bugs identified since): https://www.microsoft.com/security/blog/2018/01/09/understan...

If this is really what's making the difference... I wonder if these mitigations shouldn't be automatically enabled for home users. The chances of Spectre or Meltdown actually managing to acquire sensitive data seems incredibly low. Is that worth the very large performance impact?

Spectre and meltdown aren’t often used because of the mitigations in modern operating systems. The attacks are complex and the chance of finding a vulnerable machine is low. But if instead windows users were all vulnerable, you bet all sorts of scammy websites would go after these vulnerabilities.

And the attacks are really bad - they can read arbitrary memory. What are the chances another browser tab has a bank website open with active auth cookies, or a valuable email account? Really really high.

Re: Did Windows 10 slow down with each feature update?

#329

Post by josephg »

skydhash wrote: post #306
kroltan wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right? I opened a Windows XP VM inside my 10 box a bit ago to play an old game, and oh boy was that incredibly snappy compared to what we have now. Sure, it's running in anachronistic hardware, but where did we go wrong? 3.1 was before my time, but I can imagine.

I started with XP with a pentium 2 then move to a pentium 4. It ran perfectly on both. It started even faster than my Linux Mint installation.

That’s wild. I remember when windows XP came out I was amazed it was so large. The OS was 300 megabytes or something - and it took up a significant portion of my computer’s hard drive. Despite all of Microsoft’s claims about “media enhancements” it seemed horribly bloated and ugly. It was the embarrassing stepchild of windows 2000 - which I still adore. How times have changed!

Re: Did Windows 10 slow down with each feature update?

#330

Post by jokoon »

1_player wrote: post #107
jokoon wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand this argument, could you explain why modern software cannot run on old hardware? It sounds like it's justifying planned obsolescence.

Can you explain why you expect modern software to run on old hardware first? Should I be surprised that my turn of the millennium PC can't even run Slack? Yes, in absolute terms it's a bit ridiculous, but we're not talking philosophy here, Moore's law is a thing and software has been getting more complex as hardware got faster. Deal with it. How is this news?

"Deal with it" ? How is that an argument? Things are getting worse and it should not be a problem then? If software is getting more complex, what kind of feature is it bringing or adding? I mean it's not more complex without a good reason.

If you quote Moore's law, let me quote Wirth's law:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wirth%27s_law

Post reply on HN