If you have to compile your entire operating system to get performance that's competitive with a pre-built package-based distribution, there's a problem.
With all due respect, it's only an "outrageous" title to Linux fanboys. What is outrageous about BSD outperforming Linux in something? Is Linux infallible?
Whenever a benchmark or study is posted that Slashdotters don't like, the comments section is basically a bunch of people looking for reasons to dismiss it until they hit something that gets +5. First it was "the hardware is different," but people pointed out that it's the same hardware. Now, it's the fault of Compiz. There's always something.
I can't help but suspect you believe that because you don't like the conclusion, not because of any opposing evidence or criticism of the methodology--otherwise, you would have posted it.
Why the hell should KDE or Unity affect the performance of the 3D game you're running? That's pretty embarrassing for OSS desktop projects if so, and it also doesn't affect the conclusion--that a user running PC-BSD will get better performance than if they run Ubuntu.
I strongly suggest that if you want to get the most performance out of linux, use a compiled-from-source distro like gentoo. It makes a HUGE difference. It takes a lot longer to set up your system (since you compile the entire thing from source) but the end result is worth it if performance is your #1 goal.
It's funny how you left out the entire rest of the paragraph. Here it is in full:
Like I said, fair’s fair once you start shooting in a patent war, and Apple started the shooting in this one. But can Google spare us the crocodile tears going forward? They complained only when they had no relevant patents, and soon as they got some, they gave them to HTC to sue with them.
Are you one of those insane DU posters who thinks using juvenile terminology like "teabaggers" repeatedly is a valid argument? Have you looked at a debt chart any time and seen its meteoric rise during the Obama era?
Teabaggers care about threats to create fear to force political change.
Lower taxes, what a "threat." You're not even making sense.
Why do Slashdotters only think patent laws are absurd when they're filed against their heroes such as Google? Isn't that a bit fanatical? If Apple didn't have a case, it would have been thrown out.
Did you completely miss the point of this article? Of course Apple is going to try to defend its intellectual property. It's been through this before with Microsoft ripping them off in the 80s and especially the 90s. The news is that Google is suing over patents using a proxy company, something they have always been defended as not doing.
You believe that because you're a Google fan. And guess what the Apple fans believe? It's almost like there are two sides to everything. Crazy, I know.
Are you dense? They got these patents from Google on September 1st. Six days later, they're suing. Read between the lines, which you would likely do if these patents were from Microsoft, Apple, or some other Google competitor. If that was the case, this entire comments section would be nothing but talk of "proxy lawsuit."
What does their history of operations or the supposed philosophy of their founders have to do with anything? They're suing over patents using a proxy company today. The usual defense that "Google never sues over patents" can no longer be used. Why so many people on this website latch onto and vehemently defend a global advertising megacorp with a closed source search engine is simply amazing.
Wow, do Slashdotters really believe Microsoft is still some huge, dangerous entity of evil? I haven't heard the "embrace/extend/extinguish" line in years.
Now that the usual "Google never sues over patents" defense has been shattered to pieces, Google's more ardent defenders are now showing what their next default argument will be--"Well, they did it first!"
To remove the Google-bias slant you added, it's more like:
Google is an organization of anti-gun activists who profess their opposition to fighting, yet they arm people to fight for them because, hey, if they don't defend themselves, they go down.
I assume you are one of those apple consumers that has the religious parts of their brain activated when thinking about Apple.
Google is not trying to destroy apple, just trying to stop them destroying the smart phone/tablet market...which is their aim.
So in other words if you try to break my arm I am damned well going to break yours first if I can, or at least subdue you!!
You seem to believe that the fact Google is suing to defend its product justifies the suing, but that's exactly how Apple feels about suing to defend its product. In Apple's eyes, they have been ripped off by Android manufacturers cloning the iPhone and iPad and have the right to sue them for it.
The point is that Slashdotters claim Google never sues over patents, but they most certainly do. So that argument can no longer be used.
For over 10 years, Slashdot has been evangelizing Google for ideological reasons. It's going to take a while for its readership to change its beliefs. Hell, earlier today came a Google memo in the Oracle-Google case, where Google proclaimed not to "develop in the open" and to give privileged partners early access to source code.
Slashdot Mirror
If you have to compile your entire operating system to get performance that's competitive with a pre-built package-based distribution, there's a problem.
With all due respect, it's only an "outrageous" title to Linux fanboys. What is outrageous about BSD outperforming Linux in something? Is Linux infallible?
Whenever a benchmark or study is posted that Slashdotters don't like, the comments section is basically a bunch of people looking for reasons to dismiss it until they hit something that gets +5. First it was "the hardware is different," but people pointed out that it's the same hardware. Now, it's the fault of Compiz. There's always something.
How is that "likely" at all?
It's the same hardware. Can fanboys not read?
I can't help but suspect you believe that because you don't like the conclusion, not because of any opposing evidence or criticism of the methodology--otherwise, you would have posted it.
Why the hell should KDE or Unity affect the performance of the 3D game you're running? That's pretty embarrassing for OSS desktop projects if so, and it also doesn't affect the conclusion--that a user running PC-BSD will get better performance than if they run Ubuntu.
You need to RTFA. It was the same system.
A compile-from-source zealot? What is this, 2003?
And with Android, you get the added bonus of the trojans and other malware you thought you left behind on Windows.
People used to trash Microsoft relentlessly for constantly buying smaller companies in order to hurt competition.
It's funny how you left out the entire rest of the paragraph. Here it is in full:
Are you one of those insane DU posters who thinks using juvenile terminology like "teabaggers" repeatedly is a valid argument? Have you looked at a debt chart any time and seen its meteoric rise during the Obama era?
Lower taxes, what a "threat." You're not even making sense.
Why do Slashdotters only think patent laws are absurd when they're filed against their heroes such as Google? Isn't that a bit fanatical? If Apple didn't have a case, it would have been thrown out.
Did you completely miss the point of this article? Of course Apple is going to try to defend its intellectual property. It's been through this before with Microsoft ripping them off in the 80s and especially the 90s. The news is that Google is suing over patents using a proxy company, something they have always been defended as not doing.
You believe that because you're a Google fan. And guess what the Apple fans believe? It's almost like there are two sides to everything. Crazy, I know.
Are you dense? They got these patents from Google on September 1st. Six days later, they're suing. Read between the lines, which you would likely do if these patents were from Microsoft, Apple, or some other Google competitor. If that was the case, this entire comments section would be nothing but talk of "proxy lawsuit."
So we're defining "shooting" to be "stealing someone else's ideas?"
What does their history of operations or the supposed philosophy of their founders have to do with anything? They're suing over patents using a proxy company today. The usual defense that "Google never sues over patents" can no longer be used. Why so many people on this website latch onto and vehemently defend a global advertising megacorp with a closed source search engine is simply amazing.
Wow, do Slashdotters really believe Microsoft is still some huge, dangerous entity of evil? I haven't heard the "embrace/extend/extinguish" line in years.
Now that the usual "Google never sues over patents" defense has been shattered to pieces, Google's more ardent defenders are now showing what their next default argument will be--"Well, they did it first!"
To remove the Google-bias slant you added, it's more like:
Google is an organization of anti-gun activists who profess their opposition to fighting, yet they arm people to fight for them because, hey, if they don't defend themselves, they go down.
Why, your post sounds completely calm, rational, and open-minded, especially the part where you don't provide any examples or evidence.
Someone could just as easily respond with "Maybe Android OEMs should spend less time ripping off the iPhone."
I assume you are one of those apple consumers that has the religious parts of their brain activated when thinking about Apple.
Google is not trying to destroy apple, just trying to stop them destroying the smart phone/tablet market...which is their aim.
So in other words if you try to break my arm I am damned well going to break yours first if I can, or at least subdue you!!
You seem to believe that the fact Google is suing to defend its product justifies the suing, but that's exactly how Apple feels about suing to defend its product. In Apple's eyes, they have been ripped off by Android manufacturers cloning the iPhone and iPad and have the right to sue them for it.
The point is that Slashdotters claim Google never sues over patents, but they most certainly do. So that argument can no longer be used.
Oh, okay, that justifies Google filing patent lawsuits using proxy companies. They're not hypocritical since someone else did it first.
For over 10 years, Slashdot has been evangelizing Google for ideological reasons. It's going to take a while for its readership to change its beliefs. Hell, earlier today came a Google memo in the Oracle-Google case, where Google proclaimed not to "develop in the open" and to give privileged partners early access to source code.