正确时间估计窗口景色的表现
测量表现操作系统是一件棘手的事。 同时，因为表现是许多标准之一重要对顾客，它是要做的正确和必要的事。 一部分的测量的表现把戏是计时测试的施行与产品周期这样结果是一样意味深长的尽可能为顾客; 这帮助他们通过利用充分的做出一个更好的决定可利用的信息。 作为一个例子，一年前我们委任了企业称Principled Technologies 进行研究 比较Windows XP SP2与窗口景色RTM。 研究发现了二个操作系统的工作指标在同一个范围之内为家和企业用户在真实世界的情况下频繁地执行的许多任务。
我的点是我们等待进行这些基准点测试，直到窗口景色在产品周期到达了RTM里程碑，作为允许的此我们当时提供我们的顾客最意味深长的数据可利用-数据对直接地很可能影响他们的决定升级到窗口景色。 我们做性能测试的一个整体范围在OS发展过程的每个阶段，但，概括来说，我们避免分享没有去的RTM软件的基准测试(即，最后的代码)。 这解释为什么我们迄今未出版基准测试的任何研究结果(亦不未委任任何人做，因此)对Windows达到的表现改善景色SP1。 窗口景色SP1表现的出版的基准现在不会是一值得的锻炼为我们的顾客，因为代码仍然是在开发中，并且，到程度基准点测试是包含的，依然是一个移动的目标。
除那点之外，让我也强调有各种各样的方式基准点个人计算机的表现。 不同的技术可能产生不同的结果。 一些基准技术通过跑一系列的任务简单地测试个人计算机硬件表现以超人速度。 这样测试倾向于夸大测试平台之间的小区别和因而频繁地使用较少现今，替换倾向于跑任务的基准以人的速度用现实等待和数据输入。 跑以超人速度的基准经常实现不讲原委的结果。 实际上，我们做出了故意选择在窗口期间景色的发展对焦点在影响用户经验，而不是集中于微秒操作的改善的真实世界的情景细微对用户。 In addition, in Windows many operations can require additional processing time for work that is done for reasons that benefit the customer; these can include security, reliability or application compatibility checks conducted when a program launches. These operations may add microseconds to an individual application’s launch that under real usage isn’t perceivable to the human eye. When thousands such operations are strung together through automation, those few microseconds can have a cumulative effect on the benchmark result, causing performance to appear much better or worse than expected.
I’ve included below a video we captured depicting a “benchmark test” running a window-open, window-close routine at accelerated speed. You can see that it isn’t representative of real-world user behavior and hence isn’t an accurate gauge of the actual end-user experience. Further, tests like these only measure a very small set of Windows capabilities and so aren’t representative of the user’s overall day-to-day experience of working with Windows and running applications.
Video: Windows Vista benchmark testing
Methods like those of Principled Technologies that actually approximate the experience of using the PC, taking an OS through the paces of completing actual tasks at the approximate pace a user might click through them, tend to provide results far more useful to our customers. The typical Windows customer generally wants to know how his/her actual computing experience will change (read: improve) with an upgrade. The Principled Technologies tests do that.
For what it’s worth, I can personally attest that I prefer to get my work done on Windows Vista SP1 RC bits. I run Windows Vista RTM on two production machines and SP1 RC bits on two others; in fact, I’m writing this post on a machine with SP1 RC bits installed. As a part of our internal SP1 testing program, I know that we continue to develop and improve SP1 every day, in large part based on feedback and bug submissions from external an internal Beta-test program members. IMO, the perceived gains in performance between SP1 Beta and SP1 RC code are significant. As I said at the beginning, though, performance is only part of the story — don’t forget that SP1 also brings support for new types of hardware and several emerging standards, and further eases an IT administrator’s deployment and management efforts.
But don’t take my word alone for it. We’ll broaden the testing pool of SP1 RC bits soon (very soon), so when I post that notice here on the blog, you’ll be able to put Windows Vista SP1 RC through its paces yourself. I think you’ll find the experience worthwhile and satisfying.
Written by Nick White. Read more great feeds at is source WEBSITE
no comments.
Read more articles on Performance and otherSoftware and Service Pack 1 and SP1 and Featured News and Windows Vista.
- [+] Digg: Feature this article
- [+] Del.icio.us: Bookmark this article
- [+] Furl: Bookmark this article
