The logic in this article would seem to
apply to marriage contracts as well; for example:
You may have heard a variation of the joke: "If the devil can't come
himself, he sends an old woman". This plays off of the cruel reality
showing that the romantic market moves faster than my 400 pound Uncle
Herb running to a buffet. I remember five years ago, thinking my
35-year-old wife would last me forever. Now we have women that are that
are 50 to 100 times prettier,not to mention younger, walking around the
same streets that connect your house to the world.
So when women want to get involved in a relationship today, they can
understandably be worried about this swift market. What if they can't
compete in the future? It is for this reason that they have developed a
contractual system. They have what you want, NOW, and to get it from
them, they want your money not just now, but a year from now as well.
It's like their retirement package.
> PowerPC boxes from IBM are pretty 'high end', > and since NT doesn't even install on them, we > can claim Linux is infinitely faster than NT on > high end hardware.
That wouldn't surprise anyone.
I think alot of the problem is that Mindcraft reported that 'NT is faster than Linux' when they should have said, 'NT+IIS is faster than Linux+Apache on a quad Xeon with 4 EtherExpress Pros, running RAID 0'
In benchmarks as in research that follows the scientific method, the top priority must always be REPRODUCIBILITY. (_Computer Architecture, A Quantitative Approach_, by Patterson & Hennessy)
Mindcraft follows this principle scrupulously. They publish, in minute detail, the hardware and software used, and the configuration and tunes applied. Too bad we can't say the same for PC Week!
Their benchmarks let anyone see (and REPRODUCE) the relative performance of NT+IIS or Linux+Apache for a given high-end hardware configuration. They also answer the question of whether NT or Linux+Samba is a faster file server for Win9x clients on that kind of hardware. This is valuable research!
It's a shame that so many people would rather complain about the 'unfairness' of Mindcraft's benchmarks rather than accomplish something useful. Like actually FIXING Linux so it can perform as well on NT under the kind of hardware used in the benchmarks.
Rowan's "essay" on the GNU Community gets full billing while Neal Stephenson's fascinating monologue is relegated to one of many quickies? Wake up, slashdot editors.
Slashdot Mirror
The logic in this article would seem to apply to marriage contracts as well; for example:
These sites show where the candidates stand on the issues: www.issues2000.org and www.selectsmart.com.
That's a feature.
Who do you think really cares who's fault is it that the drivers on Linux are 'broken' for Dell's
high-end machines?
This is hardly nonstandard hardware.
> PowerPC boxes from IBM are pretty 'high end',
> and since NT doesn't even install on them, we
> can claim Linux is infinitely faster than NT on
> high end hardware.
That wouldn't surprise anyone.
I think alot of the problem is that Mindcraft
reported that 'NT is faster than Linux' when
they should have said, 'NT+IIS is faster than
Linux+Apache on a quad Xeon with 4 EtherExpress
Pros, running RAID 0'
A result that surprised a lot of people.
In benchmarks as in research that
follows the scientific method, the top
priority must always be REPRODUCIBILITY.
(_Computer Architecture, A Quantitative
Approach_, by Patterson & Hennessy)
Mindcraft follows this principle
scrupulously. They publish, in minute
detail, the hardware and software used,
and the configuration and tunes
applied. Too bad we can't say the same
for PC Week!
Their benchmarks let anyone see (and
REPRODUCE) the relative performance of
NT+IIS or Linux+Apache for a given
high-end hardware configuration. They
also answer the question of whether NT
or Linux+Samba is a faster file server
for Win9x clients on that kind of
hardware. This is valuable research!
It's a shame that so many people would
rather complain about the 'unfairness' of
Mindcraft's benchmarks rather than
accomplish something useful. Like
actually FIXING Linux so it can perform
as well on NT under the kind of
hardware used in the benchmarks.
Rowan's "essay" on the GNU Community gets
full billing while Neal Stephenson's fascinating monologue is relegated to one of many
quickies? Wake up, slashdot editors.
I'm just psyched to see memepool finally get mentioned here.