They're only showing distributions they surveyed in 2003. A quick visit to distrowatch.com tells me that Ubuntu is #1 by a very large margin. What we're really seeing is lots of users switching from one flavor of Debain to another.
The late shipping and misdocumented root password are unfortunate but for $500 you can expect to provide your own support. By underselling they've made it difficult to grow to meet demand. With such a large backorder and low profit margin, I doubt providing support is very high on their priority list.
Microsoft uses IIS on most of their sites. No more Apache on FreeBSD and Solaris like old times. They probably have more server hardware than Google though.
In my life I haven't encountered reliability problems on win2k server or later. If a server has problems, you tend to notice them right away. Once it's all working, with no memory leaks or the like, a server is likely not to crash before the hardware fails, regardless of if it's Windows or Linux.
There is the issue of patches. I'm pretty certain that I could upgrade apache with less than 2 seconds of downtime. I've yet to see Windows achieve this. The default file locking semantics in Linux vs Windows seem to have a great deal to do with it.
I didn't read the date, but I did manage to get in the first post, securing my position above the other +5's.
I still see lots of biases, many of which can't be explained away as being the result of ignorance, laziness, or just knowing all the undocumented ways to tune windows.
"we applied no additional patches and made no additional modifications to the Red Hat Linux Advanced Server 2.1 distribution used for these tests"
I remember installing CentOS-3, based on RHEL3, on a server and having terribly slow disk performance with my raid adaptor. Running "yum update" to get the current patches yielded about a 10x speedup. Yet the Windows server gets a dozen or so undocumented registry tweaks.
In the SSL comparison, they're using the fastest (though slightly less secure) choice of encryption algorithms in IIS and the slowest in Apache. They're comparing RC4+MD5 to 3DES+SHA1.
And they decided to include ISAPI in the benchmarks without including the apache equivalent. All they test in apache is CGI. So again it's IIS's fastest option versus Apache's slowest option.
Looking at the first page of the benchmark report, I see that they're using the exact same setup as in their highly contested samba benchmark, with a specific ancient version of Red Hat running on a specific hardware setup that version is known to have performance problems on. They could have at least tried a different server last time, or a modern version of Linux. Under fairer circumstances, who knows, IIS might have still won, but this rigged benchmark has nothing to offer us in deciding which server is faster.
It doesn't exist. If it did, it doesn't anymore. It's vaporware. Beyond some renderings done way back in 2001 (we don't know if they're real), where are the current screenshots? DNF was announced in 1997 for Christ's sake. That's 8 years of "coming soon". It's nothing more than a tactic to get gamers to revisit their website every few months. It should have been obvious from the name that it was never their plan to release Duke Nukem Waiting Forever.
When I was a little kid (6-10 years old) I saw plenty of R-rated movies in theaters without adult supervision. Real life is much more traumatic than any movie.
They just need to jump a few steps ahead. Say, 4-8 cores, but unbalanced in order to optimize performance/price. Have one very good core intended for dealing with single-threaded workloads, with the rest of the cores being as stripped down as possible while still supporting the same instruction set.
I suppose it won't detect those kinds of obstacles until it's too late. Dogs will at least run to save themselves, dragging their blind owner with them.
It even has an LCD display. I'm sure that'll come in handy.
Which would you rather have, a life that takes eighty years to complete or one that lasts just a few decades? Don't be too quick to answer. The former asks for a serious time commitment. The latter says come and go as you please. One is a ball and chain. The other is a 'Get Out of Jail Free' card. Well, it's not exactly that bad but considering all of the things you have to go through each day, which type of life will you really find worthwhile? Also, isn't it peculiar that when you near completion of a complex and lengthy life you rarely want it to dredge on any longer, yet short lives are often interesting and full of excitement, and endlessly repeatable if your religion allows?
Slashdot Mirror
I wonder if they'll patent it?
They're only showing distributions they surveyed in 2003. A quick visit to distrowatch.com tells me that Ubuntu is #1 by a very large margin. What we're really seeing is lots of users switching from one flavor of Debain to another.
The late shipping and misdocumented root password are unfortunate but for $500 you can expect to provide your own support. By underselling they've made it difficult to grow to meet demand. With such a large backorder and low profit margin, I doubt providing support is very high on their priority list.
Microsoft uses IIS on most of their sites. No more Apache on FreeBSD and Solaris like old times. They probably have more server hardware than Google though.
IIS was heavily tweaked for this benchmark. But for most uses, both IIS and apache are fast enough out of the box.
The poster might have mistaken it as having been released on May 5, 2005.
In my life I haven't encountered reliability problems on win2k server or later. If a server has problems, you tend to notice them right away. Once it's all working, with no memory leaks or the like, a server is likely not to crash before the hardware fails, regardless of if it's Windows or Linux.
There is the issue of patches. I'm pretty certain that I could upgrade apache with less than 2 seconds of downtime. I've yet to see Windows achieve this. The default file locking semantics in Linux vs Windows seem to have a great deal to do with it.
I didn't read the date, but I did manage to get in the first post, securing my position above the other +5's.
I still see lots of biases, many of which can't be explained away as being the result of ignorance, laziness, or just knowing all the undocumented ways to tune windows.
"we applied no additional patches and made no additional modifications to the Red Hat Linux Advanced Server 2.1 distribution used for these tests"
I remember installing CentOS-3, based on RHEL3, on a server and having terribly slow disk performance with my raid adaptor. Running "yum update" to get the current patches yielded about a 10x speedup. Yet the Windows server gets a dozen or so undocumented registry tweaks.
In the SSL comparison, they're using the fastest (though slightly less secure) choice of encryption algorithms in IIS and the slowest in Apache. They're comparing RC4+MD5 to 3DES+SHA1.
And they decided to include ISAPI in the benchmarks without including the apache equivalent. All they test in apache is CGI. So again it's IIS's fastest option versus Apache's slowest option.
Looking at the first page of the benchmark report, I see that they're using the exact same setup as in their highly contested samba benchmark, with a specific ancient version of Red Hat running on a specific hardware setup that version is known to have performance problems on. They could have at least tried a different server last time, or a modern version of Linux. Under fairer circumstances, who knows, IIS might have still won, but this rigged benchmark has nothing to offer us in deciding which server is faster.
It doesn't exist. If it did, it doesn't anymore. It's vaporware. Beyond some renderings done way back in 2001 (we don't know if they're real), where are the current screenshots? DNF was announced in 1997 for Christ's sake. That's 8 years of "coming soon". It's nothing more than a tactic to get gamers to revisit their website every few months. It should have been obvious from the name that it was never their plan to release Duke Nukem Waiting Forever.
When I was a little kid (6-10 years old) I saw plenty of R-rated movies in theaters without adult supervision. Real life is much more traumatic than any movie.
If all you want to do is deface the page, another possible target might be the DNS.
If the site had asp or aspx pages, and perhaps a database that those pages connect to, you know, like every other website running IIS.
Contest open to anyone at least 18 years old as of date of entry.
There goes 3/4 of the most qualified contestants.
Since the Windows Genuine Advantage (tm) validator identifies WINE as counterfeit, does that mean can I get a free copy of XP?
They just need to jump a few steps ahead. Say, 4-8 cores, but unbalanced in order to optimize performance/price. Have one very good core intended for dealing with single-threaded workloads, with the rest of the cores being as stripped down as possible while still supporting the same instruction set.
That sounds like a pretty typical definition. The US isn't much better. I suppose you can always lie and say you didn't work that hour.
The 280 pound ones don't fair too well either.
I suppose it won't detect those kinds of obstacles until it's too late. Dogs will at least run to save themselves, dragging their blind owner with them.
It even has an LCD display. I'm sure that'll come in handy.
He'll be defeated in hand to hand combat by C3P0.
Don't respond. They'll think you didn't see their email.
Famous last words: "Sure, I'll let you borrow my gun, when Sarge freezes over."
Until you really need them not to.
Which would you rather have, a life that takes eighty years to complete or one that lasts just a few decades? Don't be too quick to answer. The former asks for a serious time commitment. The latter says come and go as you please. One is a ball and chain. The other is a 'Get Out of Jail Free' card. Well, it's not exactly that bad but considering all of the things you have to go through each day, which type of life will you really find worthwhile? Also, isn't it peculiar that when you near completion of a complex and lengthy life you rarely want it to dredge on any longer, yet short lives are often interesting and full of excitement, and endlessly repeatable if your religion allows?