• mlg@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    The funny thing is even though it has been done, there’s not even that much of an incentive to do it because Windows on consumer side has so little defense that most attackers opt for lazy premade viruses sold on the darkweb, and Windows on enterprise side is so insanely insecure that the only groups that make high end rootkit level software are usually government backed APTs.

    Microsoft also very conveniently avoided making a new filesystem from old ass NTFS because SSDs started popping up around the time Window’s IO operations were clogging every old machine with HDDs.

    I remember upgrading from 7 to 8 and the disk IO just sat at a solid 100% at idle lol.

    • SuperSpruce@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 days ago

      I’m curious, is this due to many unnecessary files operations (due to Windows 8 bloat), or because the file system sucks at scaling up file operations?

      • mlg@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        2 days ago

        Both. WIndows 8 added a ton of unnecessary operations, part in due to the horrendous new PWA system they made to replace all the proven software.

        NTFS meanwhile functionally reflects FAT32. It has no proper block allocation algorithm, so files get fragmented and placed in poor locations all over the physical disk. Tools like defraggler became super popular because they provided serious and visible IO gains from defragging your drives.

        Compare that to ext4 which only begins to fragment once you hit something like 95%+ capacity.