From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Jan  7 22:22:44 2005
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A48A16A4CE
	for <questions@freebsd.org>; Fri,  7 Jan 2005 22:22:44 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from imo-m17.mx.aol.com (imo-m17.mx.aol.com [64.12.138.207])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E94C443D39
	for <questions@freebsd.org>; Fri,  7 Jan 2005 22:22:43 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from Tm4528@aol.com)
Received: from Tm4528@aol.com
	by imo-m17.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v37_r3.8.) id s.f.3be1e00b (4214);
	Fri, 7 Jan 2005 17:22:33 -0500 (EST)
From: Tm4528@aol.com
Message-ID: <f.3be1e00b.2f1065a9@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2005 17:22:33 EST
To: tedm@toybox.placo.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: 9.0 for Windows sub 5116
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.1
cc: questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Supermicro Hardware and FreeBSD
X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: User questions <freebsd-questions.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions>,
	<mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions>,
	<mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 22:22:44 -0000

If you nor any of the FreeBSD developers "know" about the 75xx series of 
chipsets, then I guess that explains why the score is Linux 87, FreeBSD 2. and 
getting worse by the day. Nicely done. What are you developing on, gaming 
machines? Why have you trashed the OS to strengthen SMP computing when you don't even 
know what chipsets are required to run the latest SMP processors?

What's really scary is that you'd rather come up with 35 reasons not to do 
something than to spend 10 minutes trying to find out what you don't know.

I posted exactly why 5.x is slower than 4.x, and its not "because its 
bigger", you blubbering moron. Thats the kind of answer I'd expect from my secretary.