Date: Tue, 29 Jun 1999 16:04:53 +0930 (CST) From: Kris Kennaway <kkennawa@physics.adelaide.edu.au> To: Jonathan Walther <krooger@debian.org> Cc: Jesus Monroy <jesus.monroy@usa.net>, Seth <seth@freebie.dp.ny.frb.org>, advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [Linux vs. NT, take 2.] Message-ID: <Pine.OSF.4.10.9906291600210.10115-100000@bragg> In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.3.96.990628194210.32578A-100000@lambdamoo.to>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 28 Jun 1999, Jonathan Walther wrote:
> 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.
BTW, unless I'm mistaken FreeBSD was also benchmarked in this test by Mike
Smith et al. And we didn't do all that well - the reason seems to be that our
SMP architecture is not as advanced as Linux, which in turn was shat on by NT
and Solaris. This has spurred the current design work on improving our SMP
architecture, and I'm confident that good things will come out of this now
that the coffee has been smelled :-)
I don't recall if uniprocessors were benchmarked as well - one would hope we'd
perform somewhat better there.
Kris
-----
"Never criticize anybody until you have walked a mile in their shoes,
because by that time you will be a mile away and have their shoes."
-- Unknown
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.OSF.4.10.9906291600210.10115-100000>