Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2000 12:27:45 -0500 (EST) From: Pat Lynch <lynch@bsd.unix.sh> To: John <papalia@udel.edu> Cc: "Morten A. Middelthon" <morten@freenix.no>, freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cnn.com - "King of the network operating systems" Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.05.10001261226150.1100-100000@bytor.rush.net> In-Reply-To: <4.1.20000126121045.00974640@mail.udel.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I already drafted my opinion of the article in a very non-confrontational manner, I granted W2k some points in it favor, and then challenged them to have a suitable tuned kernel and FreeBSD and the same benchmarks. I also talked a little about softupdates and several other "features" -Pat __ Pat Lynch lynch@rush.net lynch@bsdunix.net lynch@unix.sh lynch@blowfi.sh Systems Administrator Rush Networking On Wed, 26 Jan 2000, John wrote: > Hey all, > > So, I read that whole article, and I thought about formulating a letter to > the authors. I was hoping that someone with more experience would do that > though... below are the reasons. I know you have to pick your battles > carefully, and given that I'm relatively new to this "battle", I was hoping > someone could shed light on whether or not it's truly worth the effort > > - When you read the article, it reads (IMHO) as a blatant advertisement for > W2K, with only afterthoughts put in to the other 3 OS's. Everything is > "W2K" can do this, but XYZ os "can't do this". > > - Last time someone pointed out an "NT vs Linux" comparison, it was > revealed, if I recall correctly, that MS engineers were invited in to tweak > the NT box, while the Linux box was left as "out of the box". > > - The indicate for their r/w performance test, the used Samba on the Linux > box, but don't indicate why or what version. I don't understand why they'd > do that? Could someone explain? Is it just because their test software was > windows based? > > - They rate the admin and other tools, and it seems (again, IMHO) that if > something was not a "simple point and click interface", it was no good. > Well, I guess that yes, GUI makes things easy, and if they had to tweak a > .conf file they'd rate it as "poor", but is this really a true rating of > the OS? > > - They're overall rating and explanation at the end (wrap up) tells almost > nothing informative... > > The problem here is that the general public will read this, and the > "masses" out there are the point-and-click Bill Gates generation of > users... so... how to diseminate better information? > > Just my thoughts.... i have a hatred of misleading information (hence I > stopped watching the news - on a regular basis at least - 6 years ago ;-) ) > > Thanks for listening, > John > > > > > >http://www.cnn.com/2000/TECH/computing/01/24/NOS.idg/index.html > > > >In this article the two authors tests four different "network operating > >systems", or NOS, RedHat Linux, MS Windows 2000, Netware and SCO Unixware. > >The authors claims that these are the major NOSs on the market today, but > >I feel FreeBSD should be on this list too, especially when there are so > >many larger companies and organizations using FreeBSD. I sent an email to > >the authors telling them about FreeBSD and I got this reply, > > > >"Good point... Definitely a consideration for the next review. > >Thanks for the feedback!" > > > >So if others would like send a similar comment to them > >(john_bass@ncsu.edu, james_robinson@ncsu.edu) maybe they will include > >FreeBSD in their next article. > > > >(btw, Linux came out last in the test, W2K first). > > > >-- > >Morten A. Middelthon > >Freenix Norge > >http://www.freenix.no/ > > > > > > > >To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > >with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.05.10001261226150.1100-100000>