a) An operating system, user licenses, support, downtime. b) My salary.
Microsoft is a business. They are out to make the most money possible. The methods they use to do that may or may not coincide your needs. If the methods do, then congratulations. However, if you buy into Microsoft's vision (which I might add, is a rather tasty sounding vision), and they suddenly change business strategies.. Where does that leave you?
I might point out that the above post was exactly what the poster was complaining about.
Narrow mindedness seems to run rampant here.
There is no technical reason that a game running on the same system under different operating systems would play any differently. All the operating system does is schedule jobs and ensure efficent use of the hardware.
Software is a TOOL, nothing more, nothing less. Once people get that through their heads, the world will be a better place.
I use Linux because I happen to like being able to look at source code. I like being able to modify things to do exactly what I want, rather then almost what I want. You just can't do that with Microsoft products.
Anyway, check out the OS of the next Internet Quake server you play on. You might be surprised.
It seems that he would have to build different versions of the executable for SMP versions, one for pre-glibc 2.1 systems and one for glibc 2.1 systems on.. Something about the threads implmentations being incompatible.
First and Foremost, let me say that I admire Richard Stallman. His idealism and uncompromising principles make me believe that there might be a better world ahead of us.
Now, on to the meat of this post.
Power is defined as the ability of one actor make another actor do something that they would not normally do.
Freedom is defined as the exemption or liberation frpm the control of some other person or some other power.
Think about these definitions for a bit.
The GPL does not represent the good of the individiual, it represents the good of the masses. The human race is powerful because of it's ability to use available tools to the best of it's ability. When those tools are not flexible enough or do not do the job, then they are worthless to us. Is it more productive to use a hammer or a nail to drive a nail?
The GPL gives the masses the ability to take the tools that are almost right for the job and make them right. It promotes the free exchange of ideas and information. Innovation rarely comes from brand new ideas, it comes from combinations of existing ideas to solve different problems.
This is the reason why I *like* Linux. I can take a program that does *almost* what I need and be assured that I can modify to do *exactly* what I need. I release my program out to the world and the world benefits from my knowledge and my ideas. I benefit from that also, indirectly. I see different peoples styles of programming, I see different algorithms, I see how my computer works, and I improve my abilities by seeing those things.
This is Freedom that RMS has dedicated his life to.
Idealistic? Yes. But then again, I was always an idealist rather then a realist.
I think Dogers comments are right on. It's scary, but true. The people that are regarded as visionaries are notoriously close-minded.
RMS for example - I believe he will do anything to fight for the freedom of software.(as well as all other things artistic if you believe some people) He sees himself as right and everyone else as misguided.
(note - I don't hold myself to the same level as RMS. I can only dream of being as influential as he has been)
I regard myself as a visionary within my company. I argue for the unpopular options and I speak my mind about things that I think are wrong. I have an arrogance streak a mile wide, and I regard myself as better then most of my peers.
Is this the curse of visionaries? How do we let ourselves believe things like this?
Think about this yourselves... Am I wrong? I would love to believe that I was.
I know I'm going to be sitting back examining my viewpoints tonight.
I've seen a bunch of insightful comments on how piracy is costing the one group or another so much money.
Think about that statement for a little bit.
How much money would have been spent on legit software? Now, ask yourself where did that money go instead?
Software has an extremely low cost of production, especially when compared to durable goods.
Yes, I know, there's tech support and all that, but.. think about how much money Microsoft has spent on developing NT in the past four years. My guess would put not greater then 100 to 250 million dollars. How much money has Microsoft made off of NT? Why does it cost $25 dollars a person to connect to NT server? (do that math on that one. My former company had 3,000 seats, that's $75,000 dollars of income that costs Microsoft how much to produce? Hell, you don't even get a piece of paper with a CAL anymore.)
If my company hadn't spent the money on those seats, where would have it gone? To pay someone's salary maybe? Building a better business? I don't know, and I don't care. My point is that the money hasn't been lost to the economy in general, it has just been lost to Microsoft.
I'd bet my ass that for every dollar Microsoft loses to piracy, three more dollars are generated in other sectors of the economy.
I don't mind paying for tools, but when the price of those tools far outweigh the benefits, then those tools become a liability.
1) Godel's Incompleteness Theory 2) The Church/Turing hypothesis 3) Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle 4) Taoism (or Zen Buddhism if you perfer)
Aside from those things listed, what we would consider intelligent is based on common sense, which, as any AI researcher can tell you, is not so common for a computer. We the have the experience of years of aquired problem solving skills under our belts before learn common sense (which some of us never do). Add to that at least 4.4 million years of genetics to get our brains to the point where they can aquire those problem solving skills, and you have a monumental task on your hands to develop Artificial Intelligence.
I think AL techniques will come closer to Intelligence then AI techniques in the long run.
Artificial Intelligence refers to the search for a human generated algorithm that will simulate intelligence on a computer. (notice I said simulate) I, for one, think that this is an impossibility.
Artificial Life is the use of evolutionary techniques to allow a computer to "build" a program itself and refers to Cellular Automata, Genetic Programming, and Evolutionary Computing. Neural Nets are included in this category also. Artificial Life techniques use concepts found in biology to solve problems on computers.
***side-note*** It's interesting that Neural Nets are all the rage now, since they have been around since the early sixties. AI Researchers ignored them to focus on find that human defined algorithm. The basic concept of neural nets hasn't changed much, except the bit about timing of the pulse being critical. It's such an obvious thing, but it allows the neural net to store an order of magnitude more information then one that doesn't depend on timing.
Yeah, I realize that it's fiction. I'm aware that it doesn't really exist. If you're arguing semantics, then fine.. "Take a look at the society as it is portrayed in the book." That make you feel better?
However, Fahrenheit 451 was published in 1953. The society in the book was plagued by problems of youth violence, suicide, wars, etc, etc.
Brave New World by Aldus Huxely is another look at another possible society.
1984 is a look at yet another possible society.
Because these books are fiction we should ignore the warnings within?
John is right about the Technological rate of change. The real danger is the underlying damage that it does to society. Have you looked at your world lately? When was the last time you went out and tasted the rain? Ray Bradbury has already explored a future with Fahrenheit 451, and unfortunately, it's become all to real. Take for example these passages from book, as the Firechief Beatty talks with Montag.
"Speed up the film, Montag, quick.
Click, Pic, Look, Eye, Now, Flick, Here, There, Swift, Pace, Up, Down, In, Out, Why, How, Who, What, Where, Eh? Uh! Bang! Smack! Wallop, Bing, Bong, Boom! Digest-digests, digest-digest-digests. Politics? One column, two sentences, a head-line! Then, in mid-air, all vanishes! Whirl man's mind around about so fast under the pumping hands of publishers, exploiters, broadcasters that the centrifuge flings off all unneccessary, time-wasting thought!" "School is shortened, discipline relaxed, philosophies, histories, languages dropped, English and spelling gradually neglected, finally almost completely ignored. Life is immediate, the job counts, pleasure lies all about after work. Why learn anything save pressing buttons, pulling switches, fitting nuts and bolts?"
This next quote is from the same speech, with Beatty talking about why the books have been banned..
"Now let's take up with the minorities in our civilication, shall we? Bigger the population, the more minorities. Don't step on the toes of the dog lovers, the cat lovers, doctors, lawyers, merchants, chiefs, Mormons, Baptists, Uinitarians, second-generation Chinese, Swedes, Italians, Germains, Texans, Brooklynites, Irishmen, people fro Oregon or Mexico. It didn't come from the Government down. There was no dictum, no declaration, no censorship, to start with, no! Technology, mass exploitation, and miniority preassue carried the trick, thank God."
Look where that society ended up, and ask yourself, are we heading down the right track? What can we do to solve the problem, if one exists?
These two part series always start good. The first article is thought-provoking and well written as it exposes a problem in society. Yet, in the second article, you expous your views on how it should be solved. Usually those solutions appear to be given only a modicum of thought about the feasablity of their implementation. Put some thought into all possible solutions, ask people how they would solve it, but please don't try to solve it for them. There are some people who think that we would be much better off if we hadn't come down from the trees in the first palce
John is right about the Technological rate of change. The real danger is the underlying damage that it does to society. Have you looked at your world lately? When was the last time you went out and tasted the rain. Ray Bradbury has already explored our future with Fahrenheit 451, and unfortunately, it's become all to real. Take for example these passages from book, as the Firechief Beatty talks with Montag.
"Speed up the film, Montag, quick.
Click, Pic, Look, Eye, Now, Flick, Here, There, Swift, Pace, Up, Down, In, Out, Why, How, Who, What, Where, Eh? Uh! Bang! Smack! Wallop, Bing, Bong, Boom! Digest-digests, digest-digest-digests. Politics? One column, two sentences, a head-line! Then, in mid-air, all vanishes! Whirl man's mind around about so fast under the pumping hands of publishers, exploiters, broadcasters that the centrifuge flings off all unneccessary, time-wasting thought!" "School is shortened, discipline relaxed, philosophies, histories, languages dropped, English and spelling gradually neglected, finally almost completely ignored. Life is immediate, the job counts, pleasure lies all about after work. Why learn anything save pressing buttons, pulling switches, fitting nuts and bolts?"
This next quote is from the same soliloquy, with Beatty talking about the reasons for books being banned..
"Now let's take up with the minorities in our civilication, shall we? Bigger the population, the more minorities. Don't step on the toes of the dog lovers, the cat lovers, doctors, lawyers, merchants, chiefs, Mormons, Baptists, Uinitarians, second-generation Chinese, Swedes, Italians, Germains, Texans, Brooklynites, Irishmen, people fro Oregon or Mexico. It didn't come from the Government down. There was no dictum, no declaration, no censorship, to start with, no! Technology, mass exploitation, and miniority preassue carried the trick, thank God."
Look where that society ended up, and ask yourself, are we heading down the right track? What can we do to solve the problem, if one exists? Now... for a critique of Jon Katz. These two part series always start good. The first article is thought-provoking and well written as it exposes a problem in society. Yet, in the second article, you expous your views on how it should be solved. Usually those solutions appear to be given only a glancing thought about the feasablity of their implementation. Put some thought into all possible solutions, ask people how they would solve it, but please don't try to solve it for them. There are some people that have thought that we would be much better off if we hadn't come down from the trees in the first palce
Every now and then, I get reminded about how much of my personal philosophy I have gleaned from Douglas Adams's books. This is just one more example.
The really scary part is- He comes up with the most absurd explainations for things, and sometimes I wonder if he's not to far off from the truth. Take, for example, how the human race came to be on Earth. Imagine if we are all related to a bunch of telephone sanitizers. That would explain a lot about society today.
His "Last Chance To See" book with Mark Cardwine (sp?) was an excellent view of some of the world's endangered species. Very funny but very sad at the same time. I just wish I had half that man's talent for writing.
Some other random thoughts:
-When are we going to get Peril Proof Sunglasses?
-Has anyone else noticed the similarities between Sirrus Cybernetics Corporations and Microsoft? Think Genuine People Personalities and the Office Assistant.
Neural Nets have actually been around since before there was such a thing as Computer Science.
Fuzzy Logic is used in conjunction with Neural Nets and is very good at some types of things. For example, the automatic transmission controllers in some newer cars are based on Fuzzy Logic, as well as the engine control systems.
Computer Science is still very much alive and kicking. Check out some of the work into Artificial Life that has been done recently and you will see.
I haven't seen BWP> yet, but I have read the Dream Park novels. I loved the books and find the concept very interesting. Perhaps as our technology gets better, we will see concepts like these be brought to fruition.
In essence, this is what is happening with Ultima Online and Everquest. Quake leagues are springing up all over the place. As the technology driving these games gets better, the distinction between game and real will blur.
On a related note: Have you read Synners by Pat Cardigan? In it the Synners (synthesizers), channel human emotions in sync with music videos to people with sockets (i.e. connections with the brain). A must read if you want a glimpse at where technology is heading.
I have a dual PII-333 at home, and as of this morning, with Q3Test 1.07 it was running both CPU's at max. I was averaging somewhere around 30fps on 800x600 with alot of detail.
Did you expect that ESR and RMS would not have egos?
They are both human, they both believe what they are doing is right. Hell, most, if not all, the wars on this planet were fought because both sides believe that they were right. This is not surprising that we have a battle going on here.
I think the matter at the center of this argument is the evangelizing of Linux. ESR believes that Linux should become a dominant force in the world and could/should dethrone Microsoft. He is into marketing Linux as the best possible solution for all problems. ESR is a businessman.
RMS believes in a way of life. He believes that we need to stop wasting effort re-inventing the same code, and we should build upon what we already have. RMS is into using the best possible solution for a problem. RMS is a scientist and an idealist.
Which is right? It depends on where you stand. If you think money is the goal of life, then most likely, you think it's ESR. If you think that knowledge and uncompromising ideals are the goal of the life, then you probably believe RMS is right.
But don't fall into the trap of believing that either of them is absolutely right. Because that just starts wars.
Dear Mindcraft, I find your actions concerning the hate mail you received over the NT-Linux benchmark deplorable. I question your motives in posting the original benchmark results, as well as posting the flame mail you received over it. I am a system admin at an 8000 person company. I am an MCSE, as well as Linux user and advocate. However, when I choose an O/S to run here at work, I use the best solution for the job required. It's fairly obvious to me that you have never heard of this principle, as using a quad processor system to serve files and static web pages is clearly in violation of that. Where would you propose such a system be used? It seems to me that you were aware of this when you posted the original benchmarks, and the resulting revelations of your shoddy leg-work to support these claims destroyed the rest of your credibility with me. I was content to let that lie, and not take it any farther. However, your posting of the "fan" mail you received doesn't sit well with me at all. Yes, there are a few immature members of the Linux community that do not have the eloquence to state what they feel without crass language. There are also members of the Microsoft community that react the same way. This is human nature, as I'm sure you are aware. That leads me to the conclusion that you have posted those e-mails for a reason to suit yourself. It strikes me as an attempt to regain credibility by portraying the Linux community as "fanatics". This kind of rash generalization further reinforces the lack of credibility that you have with me. Suffice to say that any further benchmarks by your company will be dismissed by me as propaganda, nothing more.
Slashdot Mirror
Probably both :)
Hmmmmm..
Would I rather my company spend money on?
a) An operating system, user licenses, support, downtime.
b) My salary.
Microsoft is a business. They are out to make the most money possible. The methods they use to do that may or may not coincide your needs. If the methods do, then congratulations. However, if you buy into Microsoft's vision (which I might add, is a rather tasty sounding vision), and they suddenly change business strategies.. Where does that leave you?
Errr...
I might point out that the above post was exactly what the poster was complaining about.
Narrow mindedness seems to run rampant here.
There is no technical reason that a game running on the same system under different operating systems would play any differently. All the operating system does is schedule jobs and ensure efficent use of the hardware.
Software is a TOOL, nothing more, nothing less. Once people get that through their heads, the world will be a better place.
I use Linux because I happen to like being able to look at source code. I like being able to modify things to do exactly what I want, rather then almost what I want. You just can't do that with Microsoft products.
Anyway, check out the OS of the next Internet Quake server you play on. You might be surprised.
(I am only an egg)
The Linux version did come out first.
Zoid replied in an early article about this..
It seems that he would have to build different versions of the executable for SMP versions, one for pre-glibc 2.1 systems and one for glibc 2.1 systems on.. Something about the threads implmentations being incompatible.
First and Foremost, let me say that I admire Richard Stallman. His idealism and uncompromising principles make me believe that there might be a better world ahead of us.
Now, on to the meat of this post.
Power is defined as the ability of one actor make another actor do something that they would not normally do.
Freedom is defined as the exemption or liberation frpm the control of some other person or some other power.
Think about these definitions for a bit.
The GPL does not represent the good of the individiual, it represents the good of the masses. The human race is powerful because of it's ability to use available tools to the best of it's ability. When those tools are not flexible enough or do not do the job, then they are worthless to us. Is it more productive to use a hammer or a nail to drive a nail?
The GPL gives the masses the ability to take the tools that are almost right for the job and make them right. It promotes the free exchange of ideas and information. Innovation rarely comes from brand new ideas, it comes from combinations of existing ideas to solve different problems.
This is the reason why I *like* Linux. I can take a program that does *almost* what I need and be assured that I can modify to do *exactly* what I need. I release my program out to the world and the world benefits from my knowledge and my ideas. I benefit from that also, indirectly. I see different peoples styles of programming, I see different algorithms, I see how my computer works, and I improve my abilities by seeing those things.
This is Freedom that RMS has dedicated his life to.
Idealistic? Yes. But then again, I was always an idealist rather then a realist.
I think Dogers comments are right on. It's scary, but true. The people that are regarded as visionaries are notoriously close-minded.
RMS for example - I believe he will do anything to fight for the freedom of software.(as well as all other things artistic if you believe some people) He sees himself as right and everyone else as misguided.
(note - I don't hold myself to the same level as RMS. I can only dream of being as influential as he has been)
I regard myself as a visionary within my company. I argue for the unpopular options and I speak my mind about things that I think are wrong. I have an arrogance streak a mile wide, and I regard myself as better then most of my peers.
Is this the curse of visionaries? How do we let ourselves believe things like this?
Think about this yourselves... Am I wrong? I would love to believe that I was.
I know I'm going to be sitting back examining my viewpoints tonight.
I've seen a bunch of insightful comments on how piracy is costing the one group or another so much money.
Think about that statement for a little bit.
How much money would have been spent on legit software? Now, ask yourself where did that money go instead?
Software has an extremely low cost of production, especially when compared to durable goods.
Yes, I know, there's tech support and all that, but.. think about how much money Microsoft has spent on developing NT in the past four years. My guess would put not greater then 100 to 250 million dollars. How much money has Microsoft made off of NT? Why does it cost $25 dollars a person to connect to NT server? (do that math on that one. My former company had 3,000 seats, that's $75,000 dollars of income that costs Microsoft how much to produce? Hell, you don't even get a piece of paper with a CAL anymore.)
If my company hadn't spent the money on those seats, where would have it gone? To pay someone's salary maybe? Building a better business? I don't know, and I don't care. My point is that the money hasn't been lost to the economy in general, it has just been lost to Microsoft.
I'd bet my ass that for every dollar Microsoft loses to piracy, three more dollars are generated in other sectors of the economy.
I don't mind paying for tools, but when the price of those tools far outweigh the benefits, then those tools become a liability.
This is why free software is a good thing.
1) Godel's Incompleteness Theory
2) The Church/Turing hypothesis
3) Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle
4) Taoism (or Zen Buddhism if you perfer)
Aside from those things listed, what we would consider intelligent is based on common sense, which, as any AI researcher can tell you, is not so common for a computer. We the have the experience of years of aquired problem solving skills under our belts before learn common sense (which some of us never do). Add to that at least 4.4 million years of genetics to get our brains to the point where they can aquire those problem solving skills, and you have a monumental task on your hands to develop Artificial Intelligence.
I think AL techniques will come closer to Intelligence then AI techniques in the long run.
Artificial Intelligence refers to the search for a human generated algorithm that will simulate intelligence on a computer. (notice I said simulate) I, for one, think that this is an impossibility.
Artificial Life is the use of evolutionary techniques to allow a computer to "build" a program itself and refers to Cellular Automata, Genetic Programming, and Evolutionary Computing. Neural Nets are included in this category also. Artificial Life techniques use concepts found in biology to solve problems on computers.
***side-note***
It's interesting that Neural Nets are all the rage now, since they have been around since the early sixties. AI Researchers ignored them to focus on find that human defined algorithm. The basic concept of neural nets hasn't changed much, except the bit about timing of the pulse being critical. It's such an obvious thing, but it allows the neural net to store an order of magnitude more information then one that doesn't depend on timing.
Yeah, I realize that it's fiction. I'm aware that it doesn't really exist. If you're arguing semantics, then fine.. "Take a look at the society as it is portrayed in the book." That make you feel better?
However, Fahrenheit 451 was published in 1953. The society in the book was plagued by problems of youth violence, suicide, wars, etc, etc.
Brave New World by Aldus Huxely is another look at another possible society.
1984 is a look at yet another possible society.
Because these books are fiction we should ignore the warnings within?
Ray Bradbury has already explored a future with Fahrenheit 451, and unfortunately, it's become all to real. Take for example these passages from book, as the Firechief Beatty talks with Montag. This next quote is from the same speech, with Beatty talking about why the books have been banned.. Look where that society ended up, and ask yourself, are we heading down the right track? What can we do to solve the problem, if one exists?
These two part series always start good. The first article is thought-provoking and well written as it exposes a problem in society. Yet, in the second article, you expous your views on how it should be solved. Usually those solutions appear to be given only a modicum of thought about the feasablity of their implementation. Put some thought into all possible solutions, ask people how they would solve it, but please don't try to solve it for them.
There are some people who think that we would be much better off if we hadn't come down from the trees in the first palce
Actually, my guess is that it would return a suffusion of yellow.
(oh wait.. that was the electronic I Ching)
I'll get one for you if you get one for me for my birthday. (on Aug 22nd also)
Every now and then, I get reminded about how much of my personal philosophy I have gleaned from Douglas Adams's books. This is just one more example.
The really scary part is- He comes up with the most absurd explainations for things, and sometimes I wonder if he's not to far off from the truth. Take, for example, how the human race came to be on Earth. Imagine if we are all related to a bunch of telephone sanitizers. That would explain a lot about society today.
His "Last Chance To See" book with Mark Cardwine (sp?) was an excellent view of some of the world's endangered species. Very funny but very sad at the same time. I just wish I had half that man's talent for writing.
Some other random thoughts:
-When are we going to get Peril Proof Sunglasses?
-Has anyone else noticed the similarities between Sirrus Cybernetics Corporations and Microsoft? Think Genuine People Personalities and the Office Assistant.
-Are dolphins really so dumb?
-What would you do for a good cup of tea?
Neural Nets have actually been around since before there was such a thing as Computer Science.
Fuzzy Logic is used in conjunction with Neural Nets and is very good at some types of things. For example, the automatic transmission controllers in some newer cars are based on Fuzzy Logic, as well as the engine control systems.
Computer Science is still very much alive and kicking. Check out some of the work into Artificial Life that has been done recently and you will see.
Along with James Bardeen. Won a couple Nobel Prizes for Physics with that and later work.
Make sure your local machine name is listed in your hosts file. This will solve that problem.
I haven't seen BWP> yet, but I have read the Dream Park novels. I loved the books and find the concept very interesting. Perhaps as our technology gets better, we will see concepts like these be brought to fruition.
In essence, this is what is happening with Ultima Online and Everquest. Quake leagues are springing up all over the place. As the technology driving these games gets better, the distinction between game and real will blur.
On a related note: Have you read Synners by Pat Cardigan? In it the Synners (synthesizers), channel human emotions in sync with music videos to people with sockets (i.e. connections with the brain). A must read if you want a glimpse at where technology is heading.
All this talk of SMP had my hopes up too high.
Well, anyway, 1.07 runs much smoother then 1.05 did on the same system. I can't wait to see what SMP does for it.
Thanks and keep up the good work!
hypnotik
I'm reasonably sure that it is supported now.
I have a dual PII-333 at home, and as of this morning, with Q3Test 1.07 it was running both CPU's at max. I was averaging somewhere around 30fps on 800x600 with alot of detail.
However.. I could be wrong.
Did you expect that ESR and RMS would not have egos?
They are both human, they both believe what they are doing is right. Hell, most, if not all, the wars on this planet were fought because both sides believe that they were right. This is not surprising that we have a battle going on here.
I think the matter at the center of this argument is the evangelizing of Linux. ESR believes that Linux should become a dominant force in the world and could/should dethrone Microsoft. He is into marketing Linux as the best possible solution for all problems. ESR is a businessman.
RMS believes in a way of life. He believes that we need to stop wasting effort re-inventing the same code, and we should build upon what we already have. RMS is into using the best possible solution for a problem. RMS is a scientist and an idealist.
Which is right? It depends on where you stand. If you think money is the goal of life, then most likely, you think it's ESR. If you think that knowledge and uncompromising ideals are the goal of the life, then you probably believe RMS is right.
But don't fall into the trap of believing that either of them is absolutely right. Because that just starts wars.
There is a *great* Artificial Intelligence / Artificial Life HOWTO here geared towards Linux.
My response to Mindcraft
Dear Mindcraft,
I find your actions concerning the hate mail you received over the NT-Linux benchmark deplorable. I question your motives in posting the original benchmark results, as well as posting the flame mail you received over it.
I am a system admin at an 8000 person company. I am an MCSE, as well as Linux user and advocate. However, when I choose an O/S to run here at work, I use the best solution for the job required. It's fairly obvious to me that you have never heard of this principle, as using a quad processor system to serve files and static web pages is clearly in violation of that. Where would you propose such a system be used? It seems to me that you were aware of this when you posted the original benchmarks, and the resulting revelations of your shoddy leg-work to support these claims destroyed the rest of your credibility with me.
I was content to let that lie, and not take it any farther. However, your posting of the "fan" mail you received doesn't sit well with me at all. Yes, there are a few immature members of the Linux community that do not have the eloquence to state what they feel without crass language. There are also members of the Microsoft community that react the same way. This is human nature, as I'm sure you are aware. That leads me to the conclusion that you have posted those e-mails for a reason to suit yourself. It strikes me as an attempt to regain credibility by portraying the Linux community as "fanatics". This kind of rash generalization further reinforces the lack of credibility that you have with me. Suffice to say that any further benchmarks by your company will be dismissed by me as propaganda, nothing more.
Matt Bardeen - MCSE
Linux User/Advocate