Benchmark Results: Archiving
Like the file copy times, archiving is also timed using the operating system CLI. Both operating system use the latest stable 7-Zip libraries for the archiving tests. The test folder contains 15 files, totaling 334.6 MB. All archiving tests are run five times.
The archiving times are pretty close between the two Linux distros. Fedora and Ubuntu take nearly twice as long as Windows to compress our test files into the zip format, while Windows takes nearly twice as long as Linux to compress into the tar.gz format.
Archiving is another area where simply adding up the times is misleading. While Windows 7 incurs a massive loss in tar.gz compression, it's the ZIP format that most people come across at one point or another, and Windows-oriented users most likely never see a tar.gz file. So, in terms of real-world usage, this one goes to Windows.
In the end, I'm downgrading to a much older distro of Ubuntu, and supplementing it with Windows 7. I'll be keeping an eye in the coming years to see how these rusty GUI releases turn out-- hopefully for the better. But for now, linux has lost a lot of its useability and it's flare. I'll miss the days when upgrading to a newer distro actually felt like an upgrade, but maybe after all these mistakes, developers will learn and make Linux exciting again. I'll be waiting to see.
Nobody, IMHO, who actually uses a computer for anything of value wastes their time with Fedora. You can't upgrade it, so your own personal enhancements and bug fixes are lost. Features you like are abandoned for broken replacements. Fedora is a nightmare and has been since it began. I began the adventure years ago with Red Hat 5 and finally gave up and moved to more useful distros after Fedora 8. Fedora is now for the masochistic.
On the other hand, if you like superficiality, as in wallpaper and clock positions, and enjoy the animated struggle that comes with installing something new all the time and reporting bugs then Fedora is a good thing.
With that Fedora is also made for workstations and Ubuntu made for end user support 2 differnet applications so why only show benchmarks of end user things and not anything on network support, domain support, VM thin client viability, accessing files from the network, etc. like that things which Fedora is good at not just things which Ubuntu is I think this article was basised and another should be made with more benchmarks to not be as basised towards one or the other.
Unity, Metro, GNOME 3, Etc.
Alas, I must suffer each day for the Wacom preferences panel in GNOME settings. Ties me to GNOME 3 (or a derivative). How silly.
Now, I admit that neither of these configuration options are immediately visible to a new user. Despite that, your review is bad, and you should feel bad.