From owner-freebsd-advocacy Mon Jun 28 19:47:18 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from lambdamoo.to (00-60-67-24-29-83.bconnected.net [209.53.17.55]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B636F14FBE for ; Mon, 28 Jun 1999 19:47:13 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from krooger@debian.org) Received: from jwalther (helo=localhost) by lambdamoo.to with local-smtp (Exim 3.02 #1 (Debian)) id 10ynt7-0008TV-00; Mon, 28 Jun 1999 19:44:45 -0700 Date: Mon, 28 Jun 1999 19:44:45 -0700 (PDT) From: Jonathan Walther X-Sender: jwalther@lambdamoo.to To: Jesus Monroy Cc: Seth , advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [Linux vs. NT, take 2.] In-Reply-To: <19990629021538.7001.qmail@nwcst293.netaddress.usa.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG The only damage was to Redhat. None of the Linux bigwigs participated. Linus, Alan Cox, Jeremy Alison... none of them participated or endorsed the benchmarks. Linux is pulling through this one pretty well. And the fact that Mindcraft is still involved taints all results in the eyes of the journalistic community. As well as the fact that Apache was what was tested, not the faster web servers. Jonathan Walther On 28 Jun 1999, Jesus Monroy wrote: > Seth wrote: > > In case you haven't seen it already: > > > > http://www.zdnet.com/pcweek/stories/news/0,4153,1015266,00.html > > > Look like they walked right into it. > I stated to several people this would not be a good idea. > > Microsoft is good at setting people for things like > this. > > > --- > "I'd rather pay for my freedom than live in a bitmapped, > pop-up-happy dungeon like NT." > http://www.performancecomputing.com/features/9809of1.shtml > > > > ____________________________________________________________________ > Get free e-mail and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=1 > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message