Re:Linux is not the fastest. No excuses.
on
NT vs. Linux: Again
·
· Score: 1
Its time us non-M$-haters come out of the wood-work on/. Don't get me wrong... I love the open-source movement and approach.
But meanwhile though I run W2K beta 3 as a development system to be productive and it does everything I need it to do, quickly and without bugs or crashes. Harrumph.
Oxryly
Re:Linux is not the fastest. No excuses.
on
NT vs. Linux: Again
·
· Score: 1
I run W2K 24x7 as a desktop OS for development. The only crashes I've had were due to an immature NVidia TNT driver (video drivers bypass the HAL and can therefore bring the system down). I've recently installed NVidia's updated driver and the crashes have disappeared. I think M$ may yet pull it off w/ W2K -- at least they'll put out a kernel (VMM, FS, net stack, etc.) that will be stable and high performance.
>Linux uses the forked process model to provide services to multiple users. This modem achieves stability in that if one process dies, the others continue as if nothing had happened. Both Apache and SAMBA operate in this way I believe.
>NT has chosen performance over stability.
I wouldn't put it that way... Perhaps a better way to phrase it would be: Linux has chosen a pessisimistic approach to application stability over general performance.
Linux's use of processes vs threads only has merit if you assume that the processes you are running have bugs (and will crash). It really seems to suit the open-source model to be more optimistic concerning application code and give it the benefit of the doubt along with a hefty performance boost (in the form of threading). Does anyone doubt that Apache or Zeus could use the thread model, remain stable, and thereby match NT's performance?
His description of how Be is in fact an OS supportive of open-source is nonsense. You can be running windows and run all the gnu tools and use only open source applications just fine, but is windows to be described as open-source supportive in the same light?
Be is closed source, proprietary, centrally controlled all the way down the line. If Be were as successful as M$ his arguments would sound downright silly.
For C/C++ merely count the semicolons. This eliminates '{' on current or next line style differences, as well as put every function parameter on a separate line type of differences.
Slashdot Mirror
Its time us non-M$-haters come out of the wood-work on /. Don't get me wrong... I love the open-source movement and approach.
But meanwhile though I run W2K beta 3 as a development system to be productive and it does everything I need it to do, quickly and without bugs or crashes. Harrumph.
Oxryly
I run W2K 24x7 as a desktop OS for development. The only crashes I've had were due to an immature NVidia TNT driver (video drivers bypass the HAL and can therefore bring the system down). I've recently installed NVidia's updated driver and the crashes have disappeared. I think M$ may yet pull it off w/ W2K -- at least they'll put out a kernel (VMM, FS, net stack, etc.) that will be stable and high performance.
Oxryly
>Linux uses the forked process model to provide services to multiple users. This modem achieves stability in that if one process dies, the others continue as if nothing had happened. Both Apache and SAMBA operate in this way I believe.
>NT has chosen performance over stability.
I wouldn't put it that way... Perhaps a better way to phrase it would be: Linux has chosen a pessisimistic approach to application stability over general performance.
Linux's use of processes vs threads only has merit if you assume that the processes you are running have bugs (and will crash). It really seems to suit the open-source model to be more optimistic concerning application code and give it the benefit of the doubt along with a hefty performance boost (in the form of threading). Does anyone doubt that Apache or Zeus could use the thread model, remain stable, and thereby match NT's performance?
Oxryly
His description of how Be is in fact an OS supportive of open-source is nonsense. You can be running windows and run all the gnu tools and use only open source applications just fine, but is windows to be described as open-source supportive in the same light?
Be is closed source, proprietary, centrally controlled all the way down the line. If Be were as successful as M$ his arguments would sound downright silly.
Oxryly
For C/C++ merely count the semicolons. This eliminates '{' on current or next line style differences, as well as put every function parameter on a separate line type of differences.
Oxryly