Comment 3 for bug 722473

I have no way to test this on Windows - the 200 µs on Linux seemed like a great way between cpu usage and speed - I tested some bigger games with 500 µs sleep steps and the server sometimes took too long to handle all playercommands - thus I lowered the sleep value to 200 µs and tested some more maps - never noticed any problems during the games (even on 192 x 192 maps) - the server still did only use 1/5 of the cpu the widelands clients needed.

So to come back to the question:
Jari wrote something with "no real milliseconds anyways" - perhaps he can tell us more? Does the function indeed wait less? Is that the reason for the change?
However the big question is: is there an equivalent function like the usleep funktion on windows systems?