Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 16

Thread: Why does windows take up more space than Ubuntu?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Manchester, UK
    Beans
    174
    Distro
    Ubuntu 11.10 Oneiric Ocelot

    Why does windows take up more space than Ubuntu?

    Ok I have a random question - I have Ubuntu and Vista installed on my laptop - I have a separate / and /home partition and ubuntu has used up 3Gb of my / partition, Vista takes up 10Gb of its partition:

    Why does Windows take up so much space - All I have on vista is McAffee Anti Virus (came with my computer) and Firefox and no Files or anything else.

    I've used up 40.6Gb of my /home partition So I haven't counted that in with the amount of space Ubuntu is taking up - I don't think an empty /home directory would take up too much though, atleast not 7GB to make up the difference

    My Windows Pagefile.sys is 1.3Gb - I have about the same for my swap partition so why does Windows use 5.7Gb more than Ubuntu when I have loads of stuff installed on Ubuntu and there is almost nothing on Vista?
    "We have nothing to fear but fear itself. And Chuck Norris." - President Roosevelt

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Ireland
    Beans
    22

    Red face Re: Why does windows take up more space than Ubuntu?

    This should clear some things up for you http://linux.oneandoneis2.org/LNW.htm


    (irc.freenode.net #ubuntu) Paddy_EIRE

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Syracuse, NY
    Beans
    3,264

    Re: Why does windows take up more space than Ubuntu?

    I have always loved that article pmagill, but I fail to see the relevance here.

    @ the OP: The simple fact is that Microsoft is not concerned with how much HD space its operating system takes up. If you consider that you need a solid 1gb of ram, you are looking at this being installed on computers that were built recently. And these days, extremely high capacity HD's are very cheap. You could probably get half a terabyte for around $100 (I got a quarter terabyte external for $70... so not unthinkable I would imagine). With prices like this, a couple gb's more used my the OS seems trivial, and hence minimizing the footprint is not a big deal to them. Honestly, I would be more concerned about the RAM footprint.

    EDIT: $90, half a terabyte: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...2E16822136073R
    Desktop: AMD Athlon64 X2 3600+, Nvidia 8600GT, 3GB RAM, 80GB hd, Windows 7 Beta
    Lappy: Sony Vaio FW-140E, Intel P8400 2.26Ghz, 3GB Ram, 250GB HD, Intel x4500MHD, Windows 7 Beta & Kubuntu 8.10 w/ KDE 4.2

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    U.S.A.
    Beans
    4,164
    Distro
    Ubuntu 12.04 Precise Pangolin

    Re: Why does windows take up more space than Ubuntu?

    Simple answer: Windows has more bloat than Linux

    Linux User #355330 | Ubuntu User #15618 | Last.FM

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Syracuse, NY
    Beans
    3,264

    Re: Why does windows take up more space than Ubuntu?

    Quote Originally Posted by cogadh View Post
    Simple answer: Windows has more bloat than Linux
    Thats not that _answer_, that is the observation. The question was why.
    Desktop: AMD Athlon64 X2 3600+, Nvidia 8600GT, 3GB RAM, 80GB hd, Windows 7 Beta
    Lappy: Sony Vaio FW-140E, Intel P8400 2.26Ghz, 3GB Ram, 250GB HD, Intel x4500MHD, Windows 7 Beta & Kubuntu 8.10 w/ KDE 4.2

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Manchester, UK
    Beans
    174
    Distro
    Ubuntu 11.10 Oneiric Ocelot

    Re: Why does windows take up more space than Ubuntu?

    Quote Originally Posted by igknighted View Post
    I have always loved that article pmagill, but I fail to see the relevance here.

    @ the OP: The simple fact is that Microsoft is not concerned with how much HD space its operating system takes up. If you consider that you need a solid 1gb of ram, you are looking at this being installed on computers that were built recently. And these days, extremely high capacity HD's are very cheap. You could probably get half a terabyte for around $100 (I got a quarter terabyte external for $70... so not unthinkable I would imagine). With prices like this, a couple gb's more used my the OS seems trivial, and hence minimizing the footprint is not a big deal to them. Honestly, I would be more concerned about the RAM footprint.

    EDIT: $90, half a terabyte: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...2E16822136073R
    I know its kind of irrelvant because to run vista you need a new PC and new PC's will have large hard disks - (Although my brothers Vista Laptop only has 40Gb of hard disk space so thats a quarter taken up by the OS! - I have 120Gb but thats still 1/12 of my space, Ubuntu takes up 1/40th of my disk space - thats a massive difference)

    But I was actually wondering why the big difference between two OS's with similar functionality? Is it something to do with that Linux uses shared libraries or something? - But then again I have very little installed on vista...

    Anyway... that article was quite interesting - thanks for the link!
    "We have nothing to fear but fear itself. And Chuck Norris." - President Roosevelt

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Beans
    Hidden!
    Distro
    Hardy Heron (Ubuntu Development)

    Re: Why does windows take up more space than Ubuntu?

    If I have to install windows I'll only install xp, default install is only 1.3gb. I've managed to avoid installing vista so far, if it wants 10gb for a default install I certainty wont be installing it anywhere.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Beans
    Hidden!

    Re: Why does windows take up more space than Ubuntu?

    Your pagefile will eat up 1GB-2GB. If hybernation's enabled, hiberfil.sys will be similar in size. System restore can take up a fair amount of space too.

    I'm not sure how much space the drivers that come with Vista take up on a clean install, but on my system they're currently chewing up ~1GB.

    I personally don't care if it uses 3GB, 7GB, or 12GB, providing it works and it works well (Which it does, for me ).

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Syracuse, NY
    Beans
    3,264

    Re: Why does windows take up more space than Ubuntu?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ultra Magnus View Post
    I know its kind of irrelvant because to run vista you need a new PC and new PC's will have large hard disks - (Although my brothers Vista Laptop only has 40Gb of hard disk space so thats a quarter taken up by the OS! - I have 120Gb but thats still 1/12 of my space, Ubuntu takes up 1/40th of my disk space - thats a massive difference)

    But I was actually wondering why the big difference between two OS's with similar functionality? Is it something to do with that Linux uses shared libraries or something? - But then again I have very little installed on vista...

    Anyway... that article was quite interesting - thanks for the link!
    I think a lot of it is sloppy code. But while this can happen anywhere, in the linux world you see outrage when this happens, but Microsoft has no such voice (after all, no one actually sees the code...). Also, try compiling the same source code with different compiler settings (-o3 vs. -o2 for example) and look at the size of the binary. With HD space so cheap, MS might be adding a lot of HD space by compiling bigger binaries, adding some improvement elsewhere hopefully.

    See this page for more on compiler optimizations: http://www.nersc.gov/nusers/resource...options/on.php
    Desktop: AMD Athlon64 X2 3600+, Nvidia 8600GT, 3GB RAM, 80GB hd, Windows 7 Beta
    Lappy: Sony Vaio FW-140E, Intel P8400 2.26Ghz, 3GB Ram, 250GB HD, Intel x4500MHD, Windows 7 Beta & Kubuntu 8.10 w/ KDE 4.2

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    U.S.A.
    Beans
    4,164
    Distro
    Ubuntu 12.04 Precise Pangolin

    Re: Why does windows take up more space than Ubuntu?

    Quote Originally Posted by igknighted View Post
    Thats not that _answer_, that is the observation. The question was why.
    Actually, it is an answer. The code for Windows is way more bloated than Linux. As ignighted just said, Windows is full of sloppy code. The Windows programmers only have to worry about making it work, not making it clean. The thousands of people who work on Linux are answerable to their peers for the state of the code and if someone writes something messy, someone else will likely clean it up. That doesn't really happen with Windows.

    Linux User #355330 | Ubuntu User #15618 | Last.FM

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •