• On BNET: 3 worst things about the iPhone 3G S
June 10, 2008 7:18 AM PDT

Linux uses 12 percent less power than Windows 2008, study finds

by Matt Asay

Network World ran a series of independent tests and discovered that Red Hat Enterprise Linux uses 12 percent less power than Windows Server 2008. The greener operating system by a significant margin? Linux.

As with any benchmarking test, "your mileage may vary" but it's consistent with other findings that Linux is the greener operating system.

So, if you want to save money on rising energy costs, your best bet may well be Linux. Freedom and cost savings...all in one little penguin.

Matt Asay brings a decade of in-the-trenches open-source business and legal experience to The Open Road, with an emphasis on emerging open-source business strategies and opportunities. Matt is vice president of business development at Alfresco, a company that develops open-source software for content management. He is a member of the CNET Blog Network and is not an employee of CNET. Disclosure.
Recent posts from The Open Road
What soccer team would your company be?
Open-source licensing: Your mileage may vary
Open source to shape cloud computing, but not dominate it
Off-topic: Why can't I have this job?
Legalized drugs, now open source. Those crazy Dutch!
Will 'good enough' virtualization topple VMware?
Linux community codes around Microsoft's FAT patents
As Mozilla 'upgrades the Web,' Microsoft must upgrade its pace
Add a Comment (Log in or register) (5 Comments)
  • prev
  • 1
  • next
by alegr June 10, 2008 8:15 AM PDT
"if you want to save money on rising energy costs" you better read the whole article, not just a conclusion. And stop eating steer manure.
Reply to this comment
by mikekrause June 10, 2008 9:29 AM PDT
Well - if you equate Windows with steer manure - which I would argue isn't much of a stretch - then they ARE trying to stop eating it.
by halfNakedPappy June 10, 2008 9:27 AM PDT
Wow, alegr! Who pissed in your cornflakes this morning?
Reply to this comment
by suyts2 June 10, 2008 10:00 AM PDT
Matt did you read the whole story and cherry pick what you wanted or did you just stop after the 3rd paragraph? I know this is just a blog but can't you at least include some relevant facts before making an erroneous and intentionally misleading statement? That 12% was the high end of one test. 2008 won a test by 8%. The testing was obviouslly flawed in its methodology. All one has to do is follow the link and read the original article to see this obvious attempt to manipulate the uniformed reader. Do you also write for Al Gore?
Reply to this comment
by aka_tripleB June 10, 2008 7:07 PM PDT
Was performance also messured, or just power consumption? I would hate to switch to something based on one thing and find that I lose an equivalent amount in another area as well. It could make the switch a horrible idea.
Reply to this comment
(5 Comments)
  • prev
  • 1
  • next
advertisement

Making sense of Windows 7 upgrades

faq The basics and the fine print on Microsoft's options for those eyeing the next operating system from Redmond.
• Full Windows 7 coverage

Road Trip 2009: Big Sky Country

CNET News reporter Daniel Terdiman takes his car full of gadgets to the Rockies and the Great Plains in search of tech, science, nature, and more.
• America's Fortress: Cheyenne Mountain

About The Open Road

Matt Asay brings a decade of in-the-trenches open-source business and legal experience to the Open Road, with an emphasis on emerging open-source business strategies and opportunities. Matt is general manager of the Americas division and vice president of business development at Alfresco, a company that develops open-source software for content management. He is a member of the CNET Blog Network and is not an employee of CNET. Disclosure.

Add this feed to your online news reader

The Open Road topics

advertisement
advertisement

Inside CNET News

Scroll Left Scroll Right