正確時間估計窗口景色的表現
測量表現操作系統是一件棘手的事。 同時，因為表現是許多標準之一重要對顧客，它是要做的正確和必要的事。 一部分的測量的表現把戲是計時測試的施行與產品週期這樣結果是一樣意味深長的儘可能為顧客; 這幫助他們通過利用充分的做出一個更好的決定可利用的信息。 作為一個例子，一年前我們委任了企業稱Principled Technologies 進行研究 比較Windows XP SP2與窗口景色RTM。 研究發現了二個操作系統的工作指標在同一個範圍之內為家和企業用戶在真實世界的情況下頻繁地執行的許多任務。
我的點是我們等待進行這些基準點測試，直到窗口景色在產品週期到達了RTM里程碑，作為允許的此我們當時提供我們的顧客最意味深長的數據可利用 -- 直接地影響他們的決定的很可能數據升級到窗口景色。 我們做性能測試的一個整體範圍在OS發展過程的每個階段，但，概括來說，我們避免分享沒有去的RTM軟件的基準測試(即，最後的代碼)。 這解釋為什麼我們迄今未出版基準測試的任何研究結果(亦不未委任任何人做，因此)對Windows達到的表現改善景色SP1。 窗口景色SP1表現的出版的基準現在不會是一值得的鍛煉為我們的顧客，因為代碼仍然是在開發中，并且，到程度基準點測試是包含的，依然是一個移動的目標。
除那點之外，讓我也強調有各種各樣的方式基準點個人計算機的表現。 不同的技術可能產生不同的結果。 一些基準技術通過跑一系列的任務簡單地測試個人計算機硬件表現以超人速度。 這樣測試傾向於誇大測試平臺之間的小區別和因而頻繁地使用較少現今，替換傾向於跑任務的基準以人的速度用現實等待和數據輸入。 跑以超人速度的基準經常實現不講原委的結果。 實際上，我們做出了故意選擇在窗口期間景色的發展對焦點在影響用戶經驗，而不是集中於微秒操作的改善的真實世界的情景細微對用戶。 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
