From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Aug 28 19:32:25 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60CA3106566B; Sun, 28 Aug 2011 19:32:25 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from yanegomi@gmail.com) Received: from mail-qy0-f175.google.com (mail-qy0-f175.google.com [209.85.216.175]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D51EE8FC1A; Sun, 28 Aug 2011 19:32:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: by qyk4 with SMTP id 4so1452075qyk.13 for ; Sun, 28 Aug 2011 12:32:24 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=WG3IfAFatjaVUCkJfVpqj63+JAXcYHPgkxytf7n0ydo=; b=vUdzPwTLPVQWY/3nGdtPoPWm8QVoJGlblqLRMmUtkidOHC9NDRKcAk8JCCPxm+Scht 1+6Npw0NAQU1G/UdXD4uEDu0O5KeMLgHgxwlVYiMPpgvP8e+tBu/BL37bR0peYmf8qrA Qssul2cTwXW0qjIj29CWK2B77b51Q/MY/IyFI= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.224.200.3 with SMTP id eu3mr611409qab.279.1314559942286; Sun, 28 Aug 2011 12:32:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.224.19.131 with HTTP; Sun, 28 Aug 2011 12:32:22 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <9202191F-FCF4-481C-8B8E-8870DB7AB31B@gmail.com> References: <4E5941D6.9090106@zedat.fu-berlin.de> <20110828184758.GA1189@tiny> <9202191F-FCF4-481C-8B8E-8870DB7AB31B@gmail.com> Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2011 12:32:22 -0700 Message-ID: From: Garrett Cooper To: Justin Hibbits Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sun, 28 Aug 2011 20:50:56 +0000 Cc: Chris Rees , "freebsd-performance@freebsd.org" , Matthias Apitz , "Hartmann, O." , freebsd Current Subject: Re: http://www.freebsd.org/marketing/os-comparison.html X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2011 19:32:25 -0000 On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 12:25 PM, Justin Hibbits wro= te: > On Aug 28, 2011, at 3:15 PM, Garrett Cooper wrote: > >> On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 12:07 PM, Garrett Cooper >> wrote: >>> >>> On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 11:47 AM, Matthias Apitz >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> El d=EDa Sunday, August 28, 2011 a las 07:27:49PM +0100, Chris Rees >>>> escribi=F3: >>>> >>>>> On 27 August 2011 20:32, Garrett Cooper wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 12:13 PM, Hartmann, O. >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This website should be brushed up or taken offline! >>>>>>> It seems full of vintage stuff from glory days. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> http://www.freebsd.org/marketing/os-comparison.html >>>>>> >>>>>> Agreed. Things have changed quite a bit in the last decade. >>>>> >>>>> It reads rather FUD-like too. >>>> >>>> It's a pitty that the comments until now are only general like "full o= f >>>> vintage stuff", "agreed", "rather FUD", but without concrete critics o= r >>>> proposals of changes of wrong data. >>> >>> Ok then: >>> >>> 1. It's out of date (the obvious). This comes down to some of the >>> information being completely incorrect as far as featuresets, and just >>> looks embarrassing in other respects because it's using Windows 2000 >>> as a comparison (it's a 10 year old OS). >>> 2. Broken links. >>> 3. The smiley icons are very unprofessional. >>> 4. There's a lot of wasted horizontal space on the webpage. >>> 5. There's no data to back up some of the claimed observations (what >>> version of FreeBSD, Linux, Windows were used; what performance metrics >>> were obtained; how things were tuned; etc). >>> 6. Some of the data (example: the SQL error text under "Performance" >>> in the Windows column) is in the wrong spot, s.t. it distracts >>> readers. If anything it belongs in the footnotes. >>> 7. The breakdown is too terse. Execs and business types like looking >>> at bullet points; the technical folks like looking at things in more >>> gross detail. >> >> One more: >> >> 8. Text like "The Linux community intentionally makes it difficult for >> hardware manufacturers to release binary-only drivers." is >> confrontational and unprofessional. It's the GPL license more than the >> community that forces vendors to opensource proprietary code because >> that's the primary goal of the license -- to keep the source free and >> open -- whereas BSD allows the developer to do whatever they want with >> the source. > > Tiny nit on that: =A0The linux community has made it clear (see GregKH's = many > statements), that they will forever refuse to create a stable ABI, for th= e > express purpose of forcing hardware manufacturers to submit to their will= . Good point (forgot that essay) :). Seems like that would be a good reference for that claim. Thanks, -Garrett