Why windows is bloated?

[praveesh]

Everyone says that windows is bloated . What is meant by bloat ? Can anyone please provide am example ? . Why Ubuntu is not bloated ?

[jonian_g]

Wikipedia:


Software bloat, also known as bloatware, is a term used in both a neutral and disparaging sense, to describe the tendency of newer computer programs to be larger, or to use larger amounts of system resources (mass storage space, processing power or memory) than necessary for the same or similar benefits from older versions to its users. Additionally, the term bloatware is used in common language for pre-installed, huge software bundles, mostly consisting of demos and trial ware.

[Icehuck]

. Why Ubuntu is not bloated ?

Ubuntu is bloated but not as much as some other software. Bloat is extra programs or services that are not needed.


Everyone says that windows is bloated . What is meant by bloat ?

Windows is considered bloated because it has a bunch of other stuff installed that do not aid in functionality. For instance in Vista there is DRM checking when copy certain file types.

[jonian_g]

An example for not bloated is Arch Linux.

[Therion]

There's "bloat" and there's "bloat-ware".

Bloat is the result of poorly optimized programming. Doing in 1,000 lines of code what could be done in 100 lines of properly optimized code for example.

Bloat-ware is, by my definition, pretty much any preinstalled software, besides the OS, but particularly trialware, demo-ware and the like.

[aysiu]

I'm not going by anyone else's definitions here. To me, bloat is including too much stuff I won't use--stuff that will either take me too long to disable and uninstall or that is so confusingly presented that I don't even know if it's necessary or not.

In Ubuntu, I can see pretty clearly in System > Preferences > Startup Applications and System > Administration > Services what stuff I don't want, and I can just uncheck those boxes and be done with it. If I want to go further, I can go into Synaptic and search for packages that contain the word bluetooth or braille in their descriptions and easily mark those packages for renewal. Since Synaptic takes care of dependencies, I can easily see if marking a package for removal will also remove things I know I need (the Gnome panel, OpenOffice, etc.).

In Windows, I go into msconfig and see all those services, and none of the names of those services make any sense. I also have no idea if disabling a service will render my computer unusable or not. I also do not know how to uninstall a service (these services don't appear in Add or Remove Programs, which should be called Remove Programs, anyway).

Why does Windows include remote help desk and all these other random services?

I much prefer the Ubuntu approach--basic services; if you want to add in other services, that's your call.

[Vostrocity]

There's "bloat" and there's "bloat-ware".

Bloat is the result of poorly optimized programming. Doing in 1,000 lines of code what could be done in 100 lines of properly optimized code for example.

Bloat-ware is, by my definition, pretty much any preinstalled software, besides the OS, but particularly trialware, demo-ware and the like.
+1
Unfortunately, Windows is both.
Bloat: Massively slow default file transfer process
Bloatware: Windows Mail (Use a browser if you like it simple, Outlook if you actually need a client)

[CharmyBee]

Common Windows bloat:
System restore
Indexing
Event logging
Crash logging
System process management
HTML browser code in shell
Cached log-in screen

Win9X had none of the above (with the exception of Windows ME with system restore, and Win98+ with the last browser part)

[Firestem4]

One of the best contributing factors to Windows Bloat, and nearly any software is the development.

Windows is a perfect example in this regard to the reason many software, which start out fast over time become sluggish and poor.

Lets start at the top. (Please don't take this as a SERIOUS or factually correct statement. It gets my point across though is generally not untrue.)

Vista was rewritten on top of XP, which XP evolved out of NT/2000 and ME. All of those were written on top of 98/SE, which 98 was written on top of 95. 95 was written on top of Windows 3.1+/- and that was on top of DOS.

During the course of Windows development, instead of rewriting the entire code base (which is very understandable when considering the immmense scale of work an Operating System comprises of.) You build better technology upon existing code, rather than scrubbing it and rewriting it. Sometimes a developer may in fact just Disable a peice of coding and write a supplement around it.

Bloat comes in various forms. For instance some people consider wasted space (bits) bloat. IE: Compiz (even though you may not use it) Can be considered bloat since it is taking up system space.

Everyone elses previous examples are perfect cases of Bloat too.

[praveesh]

Common Windows bloat:
System restore
Indexing
Event logging
Crash logging
System process management
HTML browser code in shell
Cached log-in screen

Aren't these extra features that are not present in win 9x . So feature rich programs are bloatwares, aren't they?

[ahndoruuu]

It's not so much feature-rich programs that are bloated (although that can be the case if a ridiculous amount of rarely used features are installed)...

Just take a look at the typical Windows fresh install
Look through the all programs menu, through all the icons on the desktop

Odds are, there will be more stuff there that you either don't want or don't need, or simply don't know about, than actually useful programs. And to get rid of all that, well let's just say you'll be in for quite a task, and even after that sometimes you can't be sure that its gone for good.

Much better to have an OS with a few "always useful" programs that you can then build up to your liking. ;)

[CharmyBee]

which XP evolved out of NT/2000 and ME. All of those were written on top of 98/SE, which 98 was written on top of 95. 95 was written on top of Windows 3.1+/- and that was on top of DOS.

Wrong. 2000 was off NT which was off nothing (rewritten from scratch as a 32-bit OS of its own, not relying on DOS). Only ME shares the bloodline of Win9x.

[Tibuda]

Aren't these extra features that are not present in win 9x . So feature rich programs are bloatwares, aren't they?

This is the UNIX philosophy: "do one thing and do it well". I also like this quote:


It seems that perfection is reached not when there is nothing left to add, but when there is nothing left to take away. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kiss_principle#Related_concepts)

[DeadSuperHero]

If you want bloated take a look at Windows Me.

Windows 7 appears to be much better, but they still have time to change that...

[Swagman]

There's "bloat" and there's "bloat-ware".

Bloat is the result of poorly optimized programming. Doing in 1,000 lines of code what could be done in 100 lines of properly optimized code for example.

Bloat-ware is, by my definition, pretty much any preinstalled software, besides the OS, but particularly trialware, demo-ware and the like.

^ This ^


Lazy programming

(Not that I can program myself)

[ZackM]

If you want bloated take a look at Windows Me.

Yes... And, let me just say... EWWWWW Hahahaha

[estyles]

My Windows directory on my work PC has 8.3 GB in it. Most of that was there on a fresh install. My Ubuntu partition at home, which includes all programs, bin, usr, lib, etc... is only 10 GB and like half full (does not include my data which is on a separate partition). Using up large amounts of hard drive space is one symptom of bloat.

Take a look at the Services installed and running by default - excess running processes that you don't need is another symptom of bloat. Luckily some of that can be turned off, but it's hard to decipher what most of it even is, and some stuff cannot be turned off even if you don't need it.

Have you ever noticed your computer is not as fast after running Windows for a year, and after reinstalling, it seems to move much faster? Slowdown over time is another symptom of bloat.

All in all, using more resources is not necessarily a bad thing, when those resources are used to provide something of value. Eating up system resources without a return on investment is bloat.

Note that Ubuntu, especially with the default Gnome desktop, is pretty bloated for a Linux distro. But with that bloat comes ease of use - I've tried other distros, but I keep coming back to Ubuntu because it's just easier to get things working (for me, at least... YMMV). It's certainly sleek and streamlined when compared to Windows (and OS X IMHO), though it's also harder to use for some people who are used to Windows.

[Skripka]

If you want bloated take a look at Windows Me.

Windows 7 appears to be much better, but they still have time to change that...

To be fair, the only time I notice Win7 being bloated is when I look at disk space usage.

[Skripka]

s not as fast after running Windows for a year, and after reinstalling, it seems to move much faster? Slowdown over time is another symptom of bloat.

More accurately, it is a symptom of a poorly maintained system.

[estyles]

Bloat is the result of poorly optimized programming. Doing in 1,000 lines of code what could be done in 100 lines of properly optimized code for example.

Depends what you're optimizing for. Optimizing for code-size can be useful in collaborative code that will need to be maintained. But it has little relationship to anything as far as the user is concerned. It certainly is not related to speed - a lot of times optimizing for execution speed or memory usage involves increasing code size.

[richg]

It is just like a Tick that has latched on to a living body.

Rich

[Junkieman]

Windows defragmenter, anti-spyware and anti-virus applications just add more bloatyness too!

*does reality check* - yup, not dreaming and loving Linux!

[Amilo1718]

All in all, using more resources is not necessarily a bad thing, when those resources are used to provide something of value. Eating up system resources without a return on investment is bloat.
ROI efficiency ?
nice
:popcorn:

[P1umb3r]

Why is Windows bloated? Because Vista uses 50% of my 2 gigabytes of RAM at IDLE.

[CharmyBee]

Why is Windows bloated? Because Vista uses 50% of my 2 gigabytes of RAM at IDLE.

That's not bloat. They call that "taking advantage" of your memory for optimal "performance"!

[Dawei87]

One of the best contributing factors to Windows Bloat, and nearly any software is the development.

Windows is a perfect example in this regard to the reason many software, which start out fast over time become sluggish and poor.

Lets start at the top. (Please don't take this as a SERIOUS or factually correct statement. It gets my point across though is generally not untrue.)

Vista was rewritten on top of XP, which XP evolved out of NT/2000 and ME. All of those were written on top of 98/SE, which 98 was written on top of 95. 95 was written on top of Windows 3.1+/- and that was on top of DOS.

During the course of Windows development, instead of rewriting the entire code base (which is very understandable when considering the immmense scale of work an Operating System comprises of.) You build better technology upon existing code, rather than scrubbing it and rewriting it. Sometimes a developer may in fact just Disable a peice of coding and write a supplement around it.

Bloat comes in various forms. For instance some people consider wasted space (bits) bloat. IE: Compiz (even though you may not use it) Can be considered bloat since it is taking up system space.

Everyone elses previous examples are perfect cases of Bloat too.

+1
i have the exact same view on it. everytime a new windows comes out it feels just like the old one with a facelift or something, and much slower than before. i really wish that maybe even just once every ten or fifteen years windows would completely redo the os. they have the money and the resources to make an absolutley incredible bleeding edge os if they started from scratch right now. but they are still basing their future os's off of w95, which is obviously outdated by now...