You don't have to debunk this marketing move. Linux and Microsoft are not in the same realm, and they never will be. Windows is for computer illiterate people who want to "point and click" and Linux is for power users. Most people I know that have windoze machines don't know a thing about them. I know tons about windows 95, 98 and NT just from fixing the computers of friends and family. I don't like it, and as far as I am concerned, people who don't know what they are doing should not be using a computer. BUT, windows has become a GAME machine, and an effective way of creating/dodging work. Get a program that does the work for you, and you don't need to know what you are doing. A HUGE portion of windows software falls in this category. The downside? The user doesn't know what he is doing, so he is always breaking his system. In the end, because the user doesn't know what he is doing, he and his system become a liability. For linux to garner "mainstream acceptance", it would have to become feasible for the computer illiterate. This will never happen, because they can break anything. As for the user who picks an NT box over a Linux box as a server, probably did not get the advice of someone who knew what they were talking about, or did not listen to them. And the local computer geek doesn't qualify, (unless they have some actual training)
If you piled on the ram (so the NT kernel don't gobble up all the memory, mines running at 22 megabytes), disabled all the unneccasary services (if you have protected storage enabled, expect NT to slow down considerably), used a multithreaded server other than IIS (such as Xitami) and ran without the GUI, I could see NT being faster than Linux. That is just not gonna happen. All microsoft products are designed big and slow, but than they develop technologies to accelerate the machine (such as ISAPI). Geez, if NT wasn't so SLOW, they wouldn't have to accelarate everything. Right now I am browsing the web, wondering in the meantime, why the kernel + IE4 need 61476 bytes of memory. And if I start word, I might as well go for a coffee. Why does Word need 10 megabytes of memory without any open documents, and why does it use 90% of the CPU time when it isn't doing anything?
Slashdot Mirror
I disagree, my NT box never needs rebooting. It uses a very fast function called CrashSystem()
You don't have to debunk this marketing move. Linux and Microsoft are not in the same realm, and they never will be. Windows is for computer illiterate people who want to "point and click" and Linux is for power users. Most people I know that have windoze machines don't know a thing about them. I know tons about windows 95, 98 and NT just from fixing the computers of friends and family. I don't like it, and as far as I am concerned, people who don't know what they are doing should not be using a computer. BUT, windows has become a GAME machine, and an effective way of creating/dodging work. Get a program that does the work for you, and you don't need to know what you are doing. A HUGE portion of windows software falls in this category. The downside? The user doesn't know what he is doing, so he is always breaking his system. In the end, because the user doesn't know what he is doing, he and his system become a liability. For linux to garner "mainstream acceptance", it would have to become feasible for the computer illiterate. This will never happen, because they can break anything. As for the user who picks an NT box over a Linux box as a server, probably did not get the advice of someone who knew what they were talking about, or did not listen to them. And the local computer geek doesn't qualify, (unless they have some actual training)
I don't know much about Linux, but I do know how to make NT perform like a dog. Turn it on. LOL!!!
I meant 64176 kilobytes
If you piled on the ram (so the NT kernel don't gobble up all the memory, mines running at 22 megabytes), disabled all the unneccasary services (if you have protected storage enabled, expect NT to slow down considerably), used a multithreaded server other than IIS (such as Xitami) and ran without the GUI, I could see NT being faster than Linux. That is just not gonna happen. All microsoft products are designed big and slow, but than they develop technologies to accelerate the machine (such as ISAPI). Geez, if NT wasn't so SLOW, they wouldn't have to accelarate everything. Right now I am browsing the web, wondering in the meantime, why the kernel + IE4 need 61476 bytes of memory. And if I start word, I might as well go for a coffee. Why does Word need 10 megabytes of memory without any open documents, and why does it use 90% of the CPU time when it isn't doing anything?