一个困扰很多人的问题,而且这个问题目前似乎还没有答案. 国外和国内的操作系统论坛里都有同样的言 论,似乎大家都一致认定,Windows Server 2008比Vista SP1从各方面来讲性能都要高,但是奇怪的是为什么会产生这种现象呢?毕竟Vista SP1就是采用了与Win2008同样的系统核心啊,如果你查看系统信息,就会发现它们的核心版本是一样的.
一个简单的回答就是,Server 2008提供了用户想要的功能,而Vista提供的是微软认为用户应该有的功能.这个回答很有意思,但是不能解决我们心中的疑问.
根据一个Windows性能研究项目“exo.performance.network”的数据,运行几个典型应用测试表明,Server 2008比Vista SP1的性能要高11~17%.而且这是在Server 2008打开Aero界面的情况下(安装Server 2008的桌面体验功能就可打开Windows Media Player、Aero等Vista的界面功能),同样的代码为何性能会不同呢?
我们的猜测是,第一,有可能是微软撒谎了,Win2008和Vista SP1的代码实际上是不同的,这需要深入的研究一下系统里的DLL文件,对比一下哪些是相同的哪些是不同的.
第二种可能性就是Vista除了桌面体验之外,还有比Server 2008多出一些后台运行的东西,从而拖慢了性能.还有一种可能性就是测试错误,它们的性能基本是相同的,而只是测试的时候Vista运行了后台的更新或是什么模块从而影响了表现.
Server 2003跟XP的核心代码也是基本相同的,但是很多人认为打开一些桌面效果之后2003的性能还是高于XP,也有人认为这是错觉,现在同样的事情发生在Vista和2008上了,你是怎么认为的呢?作者: lgc121 时间: 2008-4-20 23:08 标题: e文好的看这篇
Windows Server 2008 is better than Vista, but why?
Juice your desktop with Server
IT infrastructure veteran Mark Wilson asks:
It seems that, wherever you look, Windows Server 2008 is almost universally acclaimed. And rightly so - I believe that it is a fantastic operating system release (let's face it, Windows Server 2003 and R2 were very good, too) and is packed full of features that have the potential to add significant value to solutions.
So, tell me, why are the same journalists who think Windows Server 2008 is great, still berating Windows Vista - the client version of the same operating system codebase?
The short answer is that Server 2008 delivers new features that customers wanted, whereas Vista delivers new features that Microsoft thought its customers should want. However, it seems there may be more to it than that. Maybe Server 2008 really does perform better than Vista.
According to this post from Windows performance project exo.performance.network, Server 2008 is 11 - 17 per cent faster than Vista SP1, running a couple of benchmarks that test typical client applications. Backoffice server and systems admistrator Christian Mohn concurs:
Windows Server 2008 performs better, even with the Aero features enabled, than Vista ever did on the same hardware. To me, this a bit strange, even if a lot of services are still disabled, as the codebase is pretty much the same as Vista.
Mohn's example is less scientific, though: he never ran Vista SP1, and also moved from 32-bit to 64-bit.
Server 2008 has a "Desktop Experience" feature, which installs things like Windows Media Player, Aero GUI effects, and other fluff that doesn't belong on a server. My assumption had been that once you installed this, Server 2008 would perform in a similar manner to Vista. Apparently this is not the case.
It seems to me there are a few possibilities. One is that Microsoft isn't being straight with us about this "same codebase" stuff. It would be interesting to analyze the core DLLs and work out which are the same, and which are different.
The second possibility is that there's stuff in Vista that is not part of the core, nor part of the Desktop Experience, but that slugs performance. If so, it would be great to identify it and turn it off.
The third explanation is that the testers are wrong, and that performance is actually similar. For example, maybe Vista was running a background update or backup during tests. Background processes make it hard to conduct truly rigorous performance comparisons.
I'd like to see Microsoft platform and services division fellow Mark Russinovich get his teeth into this. I'm also tempted to try the Server 2008 desktop experiment myself.
This article originally appeared in ITWriting.
Copyright (c) 2007, ITWriting.com.
A freelance journalist since 1992, Tim Anderson specializes in programming and internet development topics. He has columns in Personal Computer World and IT Week, and also contributes regularly to The Register. He writes from time to time for other periodicals including Developer Network Journal Online, and Hardcopy.作者: lgc121 时间: 2008-4-20 23:09
