Slashdot Mirror
Salon on Mindcraft II
Andrew Dvorak wrote to us with Andrew Leonard's latest Salon piece about the in-progress Mindcraft II testing. Interesting reading-and the difference between the OSes is evident-Linux sent hacks, MS marketers.
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
Kurt Gray laments:
Even still we have no single big source of Linux performance help.
Have you checked out TuneLinux.com. It's making a good start at being a single big source of such help.
----
Open mind, insert foot.
At the time the Mindcraft paper came out, I was working for Linux Hardware Solutions. My first thought, upon looking at their numbers, was "man, that Dell SUCKS! I wonder how much they'd charge to benchmark one of our boxes against that Dell? We'll wipe Dell's rear!"
My next thought, however, after looking over the details of the "benchmark", was "man, I wouldn't want those incompetents near my computer." There are plenty of reputable benchmarking outfits. Giving Mindcraft more business is NOT a proper solution -- Mindcraft has proven that they are incapable of conducting themselves professionally. They poorly served Microsoft by doing a "benchmark" that had so many holes in it that even the press didn't believe it. Remember, their job was to generate numbers that would be believed -- and they failed miserably. Should we reward such failure with more money?!
-E
Send mail here if you want to reach me.
So three Linux geeks have been given a full week
to tune their machines. I hope they post everything
they do on the web so we can all pick up a few
performance tweaking tips from them.
I'm sorry but the "Linux Enterprise" web sites that
sprouted up during the first Mindcraft aftermath
have already petered out -- they posted a few
little tidbits and that's it. I submitted a full
page of Apache tuning tips to one of those sites
and they didn't even bother posting any of it.
Even still we have no single big source of Linux
performance help.
I hope TuneLinux.com takes off, but so far it
hasn't changed much since the week it was
launched. The x86 and TCP/IP pages still
only have two tune-up tips posted. The Apache
has three links to www.apache.org
What I'd really like to see is the Linux team at
PC Week disclose everything they did to optimize
their servers.
Yes. Microsoft owns everything. They own Slashdot, too, and run it as a place for Linux hackers to vent their spleen ineffectually.
Or it could be that Salon is sympathetic to Linux and agrees with the contention that the test is set up in such a way as to give NT the most advantage possible.
Some of the Linux community is reminding me more and more of the old Amiga community, with the "every little thing they do is FUD" seige mentality. (You think a single Amiga 2000 couldn't redo all the special effects from Independence Day faster and at a fraction of the cost? You must be a real anti-Amiga bigot!) You see the same mentality in some Macintosh users, who cannot accept the possibility that one might buy a PC for reasons other than secret mind control messages embedded in "Intel Inside" television ads.
Not everything that everyone utters that fails to put Linux in the best of all possible lights is part of a grand conspiracy to spread fear, uncertainty and doubt around the universe. Sometimes the negative comments have ulterior motives behind them (which was the real argument against the Mindcraft test); more often than not they come from misinformation, misunderstandings or, at worst, willful ignorance. And there are cases, like it or not, where other operating systems do have an advantage for some users. Maybe you're not a member of the community that wants that advantage, and that's okay (the things that make the Amiga great for video production aren't important to you, or perfect color-matching between print and screen isn't enough to get you to buy a Macintosh). Maybe it's an advantage you would like to see in Linux, and you'll take advantage of the openness of the OS to add new functionality that narrows (or even closes) the gap. But denying the possibility that other operating systems might have some things that intelligent users could be attracted to--yes, even Windows NT, like it or not--is just generating FUD of your own.
I wonder who those (RH) people are. From the article, it sounds like they know their stuff, but obviously, people from the Samba and Apache teams would be the best.
Let us all wish them good luck now, should we? It's a little suspicious that MS/MindCraft was so interested in re-running the test. Perhaps they've got something nasty for us...
/* Steinar */
(This comment is of course GPLed.)
... but how you play the game.
Whether or not a Linux installation wins the benchmarking game against Microsoft NT, the fact is that Linux has made remarkable inroads in the past year - and shows no signs of slowing.
CEOs, Managers, CTOs, etc... are all making a decision to test Linux installations, if not outright deploy them. Electionic mail infrastructures are being built on Linux based machines in Fortune 500 companies. Winning benchmarks or not, the Linux juggernaut will roll on.
A free operating system, that runs free server daemons is going head to head with a company that would charge $12,000, just in licensing, to offer 600 users email services using thier groupware solution.
What would my message be to the Linux/OSS coders out there? Stop looking at benchmarks and start looking at functionality. I've seen the Office2000 suite. I've been to the Mircosoft presentations. If collaboration is the way of the future, then someone needs to come up with an answer to Windows 2000 Server, Exchange 6, and Office 2000 - and quickly.
All the benchmarks in the world won't mean jack shit if you don't have software that people want running on your OS to produce them.
http://windows.scares.us
Even if Linux doesn't beat NT, if it comes close, then it has won. The reason is in the cost.
This comment is indicative of how the Linux advocacy party line has been affected by the Mindcraft tests. Before the tests it was conventional wisdom that Linux/Apache would pretty much stomp on NT/IIS. Now it's some cost/benifit ratio calculation.
Bottom line is who cares? I would guess that less than 1% of MCSEs are even aware of this study. Performance benchmarks are only going to make a difference in a small number of cases. If I was making the Linux/Apache versus NT/IIS decision, there would be a large number of other factors to think about first, such as what your developers know for example (ASP/VB or PHP/CGI), or how the reliablity or managiblity stands up.
The fact that some in the Linux community have gotten into a pissing match with MS on this one only shows that they're playing the game by Microsoft rules.
--
Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.
Retail bookseller Barnes And Noble has confirmed reports that they have a "task force" designed to counter the competition of local libraries.
Of course I made that up (please don't sue me). But it provides an analogy for "Microsoft vs. Linux". Although for-profit players like Red Hat, Penguin, VA, etc. are certainly involved now, the software collectively called "Linux" is still free. Most of the contributions have come from people who give away their work for the good of the community.
That phrase -- "the good of the community" -- is important. I liken Free Software to a charity project. To treat it like "competition" is like a cafeteria trying to crush the local Salvation Army soup kitchen. It exists because people want it, need it, and are willing to contribute to it. It's a community, not a company.
I know that this comparison is not pure. Many Free Software advocates openly express hatred of Microsoft. Many openly state that they would love to see their software bury Microsoft. Some of this may be due to "hate-the-rich-guy" syndrome. Some of it may be due to very real philosophical and technical objections. I wouldn't expect any business to take this lying down. I would expect a defense -- but I don't think "defense" is something Mircosoft plays well. Instead, they counter by going on offense against Free Software.
Still, to me at least, it's like watching Sears tell people not to get clothes from the local Goodwill. If some people like the Goodwill clothes better, whose fault is that?
Save the whales. Feed the hungry. Free the mallocs.
Better yet, and ha ha only serious--resurrect Core Wars.
If both tests are done simultaneously on the same network, we could add a side app on the Linux box that would utilize the latest NT/IIS exploit, creating a DoS, crashing their system, or (my personal favorite, if this is possible) taking down NT entirely and remotely installing Linux on it. Just imagine the looks on the NT engineers' faces!
After all, Microsoft pretty much invented the game of victory by keeping the competition from running (DR-DOS, "We aren't done 'Till Lotus Won't Run", WfW 3.11 vs. OS/2, the IE remover script). They'd be hypocrites to complain about Linux using such tactics (of course, why should that stop them?)
Microsoft, of course, would be able to return the favor and attempt to crash Linux. But methinks that Linux would survive the Battle of the Script Kiddies better than NT would.
--The basis of all love is respect
There's no question that the average Joe Schmoe computer will run Linux faster than NT. Unfortunately, this "bench-marketing" is done on a high end server. Although this server is designed for NT, it would be good for Linux to do well.
:) And I don't need to mention anything about security.
Even if Linux doesn't beat NT, if it comes close, then it has won. The reason is in the cost. How much does NT cost compared to Linux. Also, you get the source (although Microsoft said they would give you the source too, but for how much???
If I was a manager, NT had better cripple Linux, otherwise it is not worth the money. So if Linux can keep up with NT, then it has won. It will only be a matter of time when Linux will equal the performance or surpass it altogether.
Steven Rostedt
-- Nevermind