zlacker

I’ve had more hard crashes and BSODs on Windows than any other OS. And I use Linux & Mac more than Windows. Not sure how it’s superior.

>>anon70+(OP)
More advanced APIs which allow more fine-grained interaction between system and application IF you can figure out how to use them

>>rusk+Fk
My favorite example of this is how Windows NT has had async IO forever, while also being notorious for having slower storage performance than Linux. And when Linux finally got an async API worth using, Microsoft immediately set about cloning it for Windows.

Theoretical or aesthetic advantages are no guarantee that the software in question will actually be superior in practice.

>>wtalli+9m
> this is how Windows NT has had async IO

Pretty much what I was thinking of. My understanding from reading some commentary in this area is the Linux implementation is yet a little botched due to how it handles waiting threads.

>>wtalli+9m
ASync I/O isn't limited to just storage, though. It's /all/ I/O.

And yes, the layered storage stack does have a performance penalty to it. But it's also infinitely more flexible, if that is what you need. Linux still lacks IOCP (which io_uring is not a replacement for).

Windows' VMM and OOM is also generally much better.

>>anon70+(OP)
The windows NT kernel is in many ways a better design. However they allow third party device drivers, and run on all kinds of really terrible hardware. Both of them will cause the system to be unstable through no fault of the system.

Don't get me wrong, NT also has its share of questionable design decisions. However overall the technical design of the kernel is great.