It's way to easy to fudge benchmarks. They seem to rely on defects in Linux. It is a good idea to fix the defects but don't expect that to improve our scores.
Anyway speed isn't going to keep you on-line. Reliability is. Anyone want to do a reliability bechmark?
I have come to expect that ANY such benchmark where someone comes out better than someone else someone cheated.
In a realistic test NT and Linux should come out equal. Back during the Mac vs PC debates PC and Mac mags would do benchmarks a lot and the winner depended on who ran the test. A lot of the ones I saw the losing computers cache was disabled resulting in a major test bies.
I can't see anyone doing a benchmark with out first having a stake in the results.
It shouldn't be to long before someone fixes the bottleneck. I doupt thats the real reason however. Why? All the FUD, the history of thies tests and the general addatude of people who want Windows NT to be thought of as suppereor to Linux.
Microsoft has there own Zellots and some of them are in the PR department.
Linux is a good Os and so is Windows NT. It's just not good for the same reasons
Thies tests remind me of when PCs and Macs were being tested. The tester determined who would win. If it was a Mac mag the Mac would win if it was a PC mag the PC won. It's protecting ones investment in a platform. Microsoft (The evil empire) dosn't have to approve in the slightest. I suspect that even if Bill Gates himself sent them nasty letters they'd keep doing this sort of FUD.
The way it's done is easy. You criple it in some major way that the public isn't going to notice.
In the Mac vs PC tests it was done by pulling/disabling processor cache. It can also be done by disabling features in the Linux kernel (not hard..) or enabling features that might interfear with the preformence.
An easy way to beat out NT is do pritty much the same thing to NT and optomise Linux. Same results.
I say let the FUD fly. This fud is aimmed at the techno savy. Like telling a car expert a KIA is better than a Lamborgini and proving it by putting a lawnmower engen in the Lamborgini. It sounds desprate. Would you believe someone who regularly make false clames?
Ok it's a matter of catching in the act.. consider them cought.
A reminder to my fellow zellots... DO NOT FLAME ANYONE... and DO NOT send e-mail to people who issue FUD. Leave them ALONE.
Those that need to know, know better... and if they can't tell the diffrence between fact and FUD then we are better off with them running NT becouse a bad admin will crash a system faster than anything and that makes what ever os they are running look bad.
The fobal of itoaster seems to be that marketing drones do not know the diffrence between Linux and GNU sence Linux is a GNU base OS [Thats what I call it] in that the Linux kernel is all that makes it Linux.
I think they are using GNU/BeOs not a Linux/Be hybread.
The easyest way to check and see if they modifyed anything is to recompile.. if anything changes then ask for the GNU source code.
If they HAVE modifyed Linux and have violated the GPL then we should talk to them civily about copyright volations. A lot of busnesses are supprisingly ignorent of copyright laws.
I myself had to defend my installing Linux on used computers my boss is selling instead of Windows. My boss had no intention of paying for any Os he thought we could just Install Windows. (I'm more a copyright zellot than a Linux zellot BTW).
So even if they do violate the GPL it might be resolved simply by talking to them. But at this point we don't even know if thats even the case.
In my view they may just be using the word "Linux" becouse of the market profile of Linux when they should be saying GNU. Even if that is the case we may want to (politely) chat with them about it. GNU could use the publicity too. It may also sound better market wise to say "The GNU software that powers Linux also powers our BeOS".
Open source has been around a lot longer than closed source. Thats not something your going to hear from people running around predicting the end of Open source.
The reality is Closed and Open source both work but in todays busness invironment of secrets and protecting your invenstments the vertues of open source are hard to visualise.
The best example I can come up with is when hardware venders close sorce the drivers and refuse to provide any sort of specs to anyone. They lose site of the fact that the real investment is in the hardware and sealing it off only hurts that investment.
There are times when there is something to lose by giving out the source code and it's fair to expect companys to want to protect themselfs with closed source. Right now however busnessmen are just affrade of looking at open source.
Remeber WWIV, Cnet, VBBS, and DYM were all open source. Thies are long before the open source movement really started going and DYM predates GNU.
I rember when people were mad that Microsoft didn't provide the source code to MsDos. I supported Microsoft on that and I still do. The whole idea of open source was alive even then.
UNIX System philosophy Simply Stated "Build on the work of others" AT&T UNIX System V Programmer's Guide 1986
The very heart and soul of open source.... Unix... and the Internet... In every way this is Linux....
I belive in power of commerce I also belive in open source becouse they are both proven.
I'd NEVER get away with a comment like that even if I really was tired... But thats the diffrence between beening Vice press and botching it badly on the first ellection.
What can I pretend to have invented.... Hehe anyway it's a kicker no matter what brand name vehical it is. I say lets rase funds to buy ESR and RS simmlerly cool transports... GNU open hardware Starship perhaps? Can I make the warp drive?
Technicly nothing new about this. I know a lot of you are not going to believe it when I say AoL and Microsoft are both against spam however both have publicly come out against spam simply becouse they are fed up with it. A lot of companys that are against spam have had the missfortune of having a spammer clame to be (in some way) a part of the organisation in question and people quick to judge lable them as prospam and of course we all want to believe all things evil of Microsoft and AoL mostly becouse it is usually true. Spammers will never admit the true idenity of the spams source. Any clammed supporter is yet annother victom...
Issues of who installs what asside It is very easy to make non-portable software that dosn't work between chips or even Unix clones but RedHat Linux is not so diffrent from other destrobutions that a program can work on one and not the other. Instead of saying "Requires RedHat" it should say what libarys the pacage needs. If the destrobution the user prefers dosn't have it the user CAN just download it.
RedHat is not blameless for this sence they do justify the practace.
In the Desto wars RedHat isn't the only one that gets slammed but RedHat dose get slammed a lot. The price of popularity.
I slam Slackware a lot and thats my destro of choice. RedHat second SuSE third.
When I rebuild computers for sale I install RedHat I know people call RedHat "The Next Microsoft" let's be realistic there will be no "Next Microsoft" just like there is no "Next Apple" or "Next IBM" or "Next AT&T" the next big bad guy will be something compleatly new and compleatly diffrent. Who knows maybe Slashdot is the next bad guy... But thats a long ways down the road.... lets worry about today instead of phantom menaces [duck run]
I use the term "Computer ethuseist" or "Computer Zellot" depending on the situation. I do not let go of the term Hacker however... "I am a Computer ethuseist or as we prefer 'Computer hackers'" But then I've more reasons than one to preserve the terminology... I am also a writing hack.. I write storys no one publishes.
The correct term for Hacker is of corse hobbyist. Sort of anyway. People who call there jobs "Hobbys" are hackers. Calling a writer a hack is an insult suggesting the writer is only a hobbyist and not making money. Truck drivers call themselfs hackers. And of course there are ski hackers. The incorrect use of the term came from a late 1970s news report about a computer 'hacker' who broke into some computer systems. In that news report the word was used correctly to mean hobbyist but people not knowing what a hacker was took it to mean a computer criminal. The term stuck to spite real hackers fighting to maintain the correct terminology.
The terminology rift still exists to this day. In technology, sports, writing, and other fealds that have 'hackers' the term remains true but outside that say your a hacker and people think your a criminal.
"Surfing" the web has a more innocent sorce. Rember channel surfing with a TV remote control?
IMO This trys to clame a Unix legacy for NT that dose not exist. The reality is (if I have my facts correct) NT is made from the OS/2 code Microsoft wrote for IBM after winning the rights to it in cort and losing the rights to IBMs half of the code. My version of events (correct or not) supports Microsofts clame of a "Modern design" something you can have with this legacy clame.
I personally believe NT could be a very nice Os but right now Microsoft is trying to make it do to much to soon. They need to take there time and make shure everything works before adding more on. At this point it wouldn't hurt if NT were stripped down a bit so Microsoft can make it more reliable.
But Microsoft wants to make an Os for everyone. Remiinds me of Xmodem. Made only with the authers needs in mind and eventually became the standard for downloading files on BBSes. Other attempts were made to be all things to all people and ended up being nothing and for no one.
Well thats my opinion anyway. If I'm wrong slap me. Better yet slap me anyway I enjoy it.
Slashdot Mirror
It's way to easy to fudge benchmarks.
They seem to rely on defects in Linux. It is a good idea to fix the defects but don't expect that to improve our scores.
Anyway speed isn't going to keep you on-line. Reliability is.
Anyone want to do a reliability bechmark?
> 1.They cheated.
I have come to expect that ANY such benchmark where someone comes out better than someone else someone cheated.
In a realistic test NT and Linux should come out equal.
Back during the Mac vs PC debates PC and Mac mags would do benchmarks a lot and the winner depended on who ran the test. A lot of the ones I saw the losing computers cache was disabled resulting in a major test bies.
I can't see anyone doing a benchmark with out first having a stake in the results.
It shouldn't be to long before someone fixes the bottleneck. I doupt thats the real reason however.
Why? All the FUD, the history of thies tests and the general addatude of people who want Windows NT to be thought of as suppereor to Linux.
Microsoft has there own Zellots and some of them are in the PR department.
Linux is a good Os and so is Windows NT.
It's just not good for the same reasons
Thies tests remind me of when PCs and Macs were being tested. The tester determined who would win. If it was a Mac mag the Mac would win if it was a PC mag the PC won. It's protecting ones investment in a platform. Microsoft (The evil empire) dosn't have to approve in the slightest. I suspect that even if Bill Gates himself sent them nasty letters they'd keep doing this sort of FUD.
The way it's done is easy. You criple it in some major way that the public isn't going to notice.
In the Mac vs PC tests it was done by pulling/disabling processor cache. It can also be done by disabling features in the Linux kernel (not hard..) or enabling features that might interfear with the preformence.
An easy way to beat out NT is do pritty much the same thing to NT and optomise Linux. Same results.
I say let the FUD fly. This fud is aimmed at the techno savy. Like telling a car expert a KIA is better than a Lamborgini and proving it by putting a lawnmower engen in the Lamborgini. It sounds desprate. Would you believe someone who regularly make false clames?
Ok it's a matter of catching in the act.. consider them cought.
A reminder to my fellow zellots... DO NOT FLAME ANYONE... and DO NOT send e-mail to people who issue FUD. Leave them ALONE.
Those that need to know, know better...
and if they can't tell the diffrence between fact and FUD then we are better off with them running NT becouse a bad admin will crash a system faster than anything and that makes what ever os they are running look bad.
Mr Big is going to be mad when he finds out....
:)
The fobal of itoaster seems to be that marketing drones do not know the diffrence between Linux and GNU sence Linux is a GNU base OS [Thats what I call it] in that the Linux kernel is all that makes it Linux.
I think they are using GNU/BeOs not a Linux/Be hybread.
The easyest way to check and see if they modifyed anything is to recompile.. if anything changes then ask for the GNU source code.
If they HAVE modifyed Linux and have violated the GPL then we should talk to them civily about copyright volations. A lot of busnesses are supprisingly ignorent of copyright laws.
I myself had to defend my installing Linux on used computers my boss is selling instead of Windows. My boss had no intention of paying for any Os he thought we could just Install Windows. (I'm more a copyright zellot than a Linux zellot BTW).
So even if they do violate the GPL it might be resolved simply by talking to them. But at this point we don't even know if thats even the case.
In my view they may just be using the word "Linux" becouse of the market profile of Linux when they should be saying GNU. Even if that is the case we may want to (politely) chat with them about it. GNU could use the publicity too. It may also sound better market wise to say "The GNU software that powers Linux also powers our BeOS".
jeff
Open source has been around a lot longer than closed source. Thats not something your going to hear from people running around predicting the end of Open source.
The reality is Closed and Open source both work but in todays busness invironment of secrets and protecting your invenstments the vertues of open source are hard to visualise.
The best example I can come up with is when hardware venders close sorce the drivers and refuse to provide any sort of specs to anyone.
They lose site of the fact that the real investment is in the hardware and sealing it off only hurts that investment.
There are times when there is something to lose by giving out the source code and it's fair to expect companys to want to protect themselfs with closed source. Right now however busnessmen are just affrade of looking at open source.
Remeber WWIV, Cnet, VBBS, and DYM were all open source. Thies are long before the open source movement really started going and DYM predates GNU.
I rember when people were mad that Microsoft didn't provide the source code to MsDos. I supported Microsoft on that and I still do. The whole idea of open source was alive even then.
UNIX System philosophy Simply Stated
"Build on the work of others"
AT&T UNIX System V Programmer's Guide
1986
The very heart and soul of open source.... Unix... and the Internet...
In every way this is Linux....
I belive in power of commerce I also belive in open source becouse they are both proven.
I'd NEVER get away with a comment like that even if I really was tired...
But thats the diffrence between beening Vice press and botching it badly on the first ellection.
What can I pretend to have invented....
Hehe anyway it's a kicker no matter what brand name vehical it is.
I say lets rase funds to buy ESR and RS simmlerly cool transports...
GNU open hardware Starship perhaps?
Can I make the warp drive?
Technicly nothing new about this.
I know a lot of you are not going to believe it when I say AoL and Microsoft are both against spam however both have publicly come out against spam simply becouse they are fed up with it.
A lot of companys that are against spam have had the missfortune of having a spammer clame to be (in some way) a part of the organisation in question and people quick to judge lable them as prospam and of course we all want to believe all things evil of Microsoft and AoL mostly becouse it is usually true.
Spammers will never admit the true idenity of the spams source. Any clammed supporter is yet annother victom...
Ahh so Mars is where Microsoft wants us to go today...
:)
Or were the Mars environment microbs were Ms Earth Microbes with a defect of surviving only in a simulated martion environment..
My appologys I just had to do that
Ms Earth = Mars...
Issues of who installs what asside
It is very easy to make non-portable software
that dosn't work between chips or even Unix clones
but RedHat Linux is not so diffrent from other
destrobutions that a program can work on one and
not the other.
Instead of saying "Requires RedHat" it should
say what libarys the pacage needs.
If the destrobution the user prefers dosn't
have it the user CAN just download it.
RedHat is not blameless for this sence they do
justify the practace.
In the Desto wars RedHat isn't the only one
that gets slammed but RedHat dose get slammed
a lot. The price of popularity.
I slam Slackware a lot and thats my destro of choice. RedHat second SuSE third.
When I rebuild computers for sale I install RedHat
I know people call RedHat "The Next Microsoft"
let's be realistic there will be no "Next Microsoft" just like there is no "Next Apple" or
"Next IBM" or "Next AT&T" the next big bad guy will be something compleatly new and compleatly diffrent.
Who knows maybe Slashdot is the next bad guy...
But thats a long ways down the road.... lets worry
about today instead of phantom menaces [duck run]
I use the term "Computer ethuseist" or
"Computer Zellot" depending on the situation.
I do not let go of the term Hacker however...
"I am a Computer ethuseist or as we prefer
'Computer hackers'"
But then I've more reasons than one to preserve
the terminology...
I am also a writing hack.. I write storys no one
publishes.
It's worked for me so far....
The correct term for Hacker is of corse hobbyist. Sort of anyway. People who call there jobs "Hobbys" are hackers. Calling a writer a hack is an insult suggesting the writer is only a hobbyist and not making money. Truck drivers call themselfs hackers. And of course there are ski hackers.
The incorrect use of the term came from a late 1970s news report about a computer 'hacker' who broke into some computer systems. In that news report the word was used correctly to mean hobbyist but people not knowing what a hacker was took it to mean a computer criminal. The term stuck to spite real hackers fighting to maintain the correct terminology.
The terminology rift still exists to this day. In technology, sports, writing, and other fealds that have 'hackers' the term remains true but outside that say your a hacker and people think your a criminal.
"Surfing" the web has a more innocent sorce. Rember channel surfing with a TV remote control?
IMO This trys to clame a Unix legacy for NT that dose not exist.
The reality is (if I have my facts correct) NT is made from the OS/2 code Microsoft wrote for IBM after winning the rights to it in cort and losing the rights to IBMs half of the code.
My version of events (correct or not) supports Microsofts clame of a "Modern design" something you can have with this legacy clame.
I personally believe NT could be a very nice Os but right now Microsoft is trying to make it do to much to soon. They need to take there time and make shure everything works before adding more on. At this point it wouldn't hurt if NT were stripped down a bit so Microsoft can make it more reliable.
But Microsoft wants to make an Os for everyone. Remiinds me of Xmodem. Made only with the authers needs in mind and eventually became the standard for downloading files on BBSes. Other attempts were made to be all things to all people and ended up being nothing and for no one.
Well thats my opinion anyway. If I'm wrong slap me. Better yet slap me anyway I enjoy it.