Skip to main content

A Microsoft Employees Rant: “I Contribute to the Windows Kernel. We Are Slower Than Other Operating Systems. Here Is Why.”




I was having a discussion in a forum with Marc Bevand about how windows is still slow despite of the “fast” windows 8.
And out of nowhere an anonymous Microsoft developer who contributes to the Windows NT kernel wrote a fantastic and honest response acknowledging this problem and explaining its cause.

The post has been deleted.
But I am re-posting it since it’s too insightful.

PS: The anonymous poster himself deleted his post as he thought it was too cruel and did not help make his point, which is about the social dynamics of spontaneous contribution. However he let me know he does not mind the re-post at the condition I redact the SHA1 hash info, which I did

I’m a developer in Windows and contribute to the NT kernel. (Proof: the SHA1 hash of revision #102 of [Edit: filename redacted] is [Edit: hash redacted].) I’m posting through Tor for obvious reasons.
Windows is indeed slower than other operating systems in many scenarios, and the gap is worsening. The cause of the problem is social. There’s almost none of the improvement for its own sake, for the sake of glory, that you see in the Linux world.
Granted, occasionally one sees naive people try to make things better. These people almost always fail. We can and do improve performance for specific scenarios that people with the ability to allocate resources believe impact business goals, but this work is Sisyphean. There’s no formal or informal program of systemic performance improvement. We started caring about security because pre-SP3 Windows XP was an existential threat to the business. Our low performance is not an existential threat to the business.
See, component owners are generally openly hostile to outside patches: if you’re a dev, accepting an outside patch makes your lead angry (due to the need to maintain this patch and to justify in in shiproom the unplanned design change), makes test angry (because test is on the hook for making sure the change doesn’t break anything, and you just made work for them), and PM is angry (due to the schedule implications of code churn). There’s just no incentive to accept changes from outside your own team. You can always find a reason to say “no”, and you have very little incentive to say “yes”.
There’s also little incentive to create changes in the first place. On linux-kernel, if you improve the performance of directory traversal by a consistent 5%, you’re praised and thanked. Here, if you do that and you’re not on the object manager team, then even if you do get your code past the Ob owners and into the tree, your own management doesn’t care. Yes, making a massive improvement will get you noticed by senior people and could be a boon for your career, but the improvement has to be very large to attract that kind of attention. Incremental improvements just annoy people and are, at best, neutral for your career. If you’re unlucky and you tell your lead about how you improved performance of some other component on the system, he’ll just ask you whether you can accelerate your bug glide.
Is it any wonder that people stop trying to do unplanned work after a little while?
Another reason for the quality gap is that that we’ve been having trouble keeping talented people. Google and other large Seattle-area companies keep poaching our best, most experienced developers, and we hire youths straight from college to replace them. You find SDEs and SDE IIs maintaining hugely import systems. These developers mean well and are usually adequately intelligent, but they don’t understand why certain decisions were made, don’t have a thorough understanding of the intricate details of how their systems work, and most importantly, don’t want to change anything that already works.
These junior developers also have a tendency to make improvements to the system by implementing brand-new features instead of improving old ones. Look at recent Microsoft releases: we don’t fix old features, but accrete new ones. New features help much more at review time than improvements to old ones.
(That’s literally the explanation for PowerShell. Many of us wanted to improve cmd.exe, but couldn’t.)
More examples:

  • We can’t touch named pipes. Let’s add %INTERNAL_NOTIFICATION_SYSTEM%! And let’s make it inconsistent with virtually every other named NT primitive.
  • We can’t expose %INTERNAL_NOTIFICATION_SYSTEM% to the rest of the world because we don’t want to fill out paperwork and we’re not losing sales because we only have 1990s-era Win32 APIs available publicly.
  • We can’t touch DCOM. So we create another %C#_REMOTING_FLAVOR_OF_THE_WEEK%!
  • XNA. Need I say more?
  • Why would anyone need an archive format that supports files larger than 2GB?
  • Let’s support symbolic links, but make sure that nobody can use them so we don’t get blamed for security vulnerabilities (Great! Now we get to look sage and responsible!)
  • We can’t touch Source Depot, so let’s hack together SDX!
  • We can’t touch SDX, so let’s pretend for four releases that we’re moving to TFS while not actually changing anything!
  • Oh god, the NTFS code is a purple opium-fueled Victorian horror novel that uses global recursive locks and SEH for flow control. Let’s write ReFs instead. (And hey, let’s start by copying and pasting the NTFS source code and removing half the features! Then let’s add checksums, because checksums are cool, right, and now with checksums we’re just as good as ZFS? Right? And who needs quotas anyway?)
  • We just can’t be fucked to implement C11 support, and variadic templates were just too hard to implement in a year. (But ohmygosh we turned “^” into a reference-counted pointer operator. Oh, and what’s a reference cycle?)
Look: Microsoft still has some old-fashioned hardcore talented developers who can code circles around brogrammers down in the valley. These people have a keen appreciation of the complexities of operating system development and an eye for good, clean design. The NT kernel is still much better than Linux in some ways — you guys be trippin’ with your overcommit-by-default MM nonsense — but our good people keep retiring or moving to other large technology companies, and there are few new people achieving the level of technical virtuosity needed to replace the people who leave. We fill headcount with nine-to-five-with-kids types, desperate-to-please H1Bs, and Google rejects. We occasionally get good people anyway, as if by mistake, but not enough. Is it any wonder we’re falling behind? The rot has already set in.

Popular posts from this blog

LibrePlanet 2017: Liberating your open source experience

LibrePlanet is a yearly gathering of free software activists, users, and contributors—and, it's my favorite conference of the year. Here's why.
LibrePlanet is run by the Free Software Foundation, and has steadily evolved from a yearly members' meeting with presentations from staff and board members to a full blown two-day conference with speakers and attendees from all over the world. The event brings people who care about free software together to talk about the future of the movement, address current challenges, and celebrate successes.
Prelude I was invited to give a talk at LibrePlanet 2017 on 25th March at MIT, in Cambridge, Massachusetts representing Mozilla as a Tech Speaker. I reached Boston on 25th early morning. Around 1 AM. The journey itself was awesome till I realized that you don't get Uber or Lyft at Boston Airport.

Not that the apps don't function there. They work! Just no driver will be ready to pick you up from Airport at that time. After trying t…

Maximum Call Stack size exceeded: My mishap with nodejs and MongoDB

Working with nodejs is always an adventure and mix MongoDB with it, and it becomes very interesting for a nodejs enthusiast like me.

While working on a pet project involving Native MongoDb driver and nodejs I encountered a weird problem.

RangeError:MaximumcallstacksizeexceededAs usual my first thought was to Google out what I was facing and googling it out led me to the following to links.RangeError: Maximum call stack size exceededCalling Model.collection.save() RangeError: Maximum call stack size exceeded Also In some posts in MongoDB’s forum I saw that peoples said saving in `process.nextTick` or wrapping the call function in `parseInt` will also fix the problem, but it most certainly didn't work for me.So I started digging in on my own and soon enough found the reason.

If you’re trying to save a document and saving process somehow exited with an RangeError: Maximum call stack size exceeded exception, it’s related to what you want to save in the database. I had this problem a…

All Hands 2016: MozLondon, A recount

I recently had the opportunity to take part in Mozilla All Hands 2016 (a.k.a #MozLondon). Mozilla All hands. All Hands are bi-yearly events of Mozilla where all the paid staff from different teams around the globe meet with each other along with a handful of invited volunteers to disscuss about future projects and get some work done! This year it was in London and just immediately before Brexit (I actually didn't even know about it before I went there). It was a work week, so essentially the event spanned from Monday to Friday. I arrived at LHR on Monday morning, and then there was the awesome Heathrow Express which took me to Paddington, just a 7 mins walk away from Hilton Metropole where I was staying with a bunch of other people. The event started with all of us having an evening orientation familiarizing us with rules and regulations along with Code of Conduct(that turned out to be really important later on...).  Tuesday started with a Planery. Which you can see if you are lo…