View Single Post
Old 03-27-05, 02:42 AM   #14
Lauwenmark78
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 33
Default Re: Who has faster multitasking OS/2 or Linux or Windows XP

BeOS has a very reactive multitasking architecture - in fact, it was one of its selling points. It used fine-grained threading with a fully preemptive kernel to achieve a high level of responsiveness.

When compared with recent competitors (Linux 2.6.x, Windows NT5, OSX), it doesn't show a perceptible difference, though. That's because the technologies BeOS used are now present in all of them. IMHO, it is still superior to Windows because a given application could hardly lock the whole system (something still easy to achieve today under Windows).

It is pretty hard to determine who has "the faster multitasking" - given the common power of today's CPUs, the context-switching costs are hardly a problem anymore (except for specific cases, like real-time scheduling). The two points that are really relevant today for a desktop environment are:

- How responsive applications are;
- How clever the resources distribution is.

Windows NT5 (The kernel of Windows 2000 and above) multitasking is responsive, but not very clever: an application can get all the CPU, resulting in an overall locked, unusable system. Linux tends to favor intelligent resource management - it is much harder for an application to hog the CPU; on the other hand, it can sometimes be less responsive as NT5, since the "top" application may not get as much CPU time as it would under NT5.
Lauwenmark78 is offline   Reply With Quote