From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Aug 28 19:48:46 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F132106566B; Sun, 28 Aug 2011 19:48:46 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from chmeeedalf@gmail.com) Received: from mail-gw0-f54.google.com (mail-gw0-f54.google.com [74.125.83.54]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E48138FC13; Sun, 28 Aug 2011 19:48:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: by gwb15 with SMTP id 15so5157117gwb.13 for ; Sun, 28 Aug 2011 12:48:45 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=cc:message-id:from:to:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:subject:date:references :x-mailer; bh=ImPVA2in7aoGLMCxGYCCftn9GC8DlMZ0o8C4sp8xBy8=; b=VJ2zT01lNBY+ZKCMumL/PBSz9RCst+l5ydUNnpsgtVE9JFZgFe1nAnARWXaasejLYU rA9OY70z7/rOKIZ9YFT24cVhiFwNLsM5XHbwL0nb/IlJ1aJI3AYYqpkv2mrLdPzedq6+ OVSKEvKu7KXSlvFhSYFnZbjThFhqxuXbeNw+4= Received: by 10.42.156.74 with SMTP id y10mr3759393icw.164.1314559510868; Sun, 28 Aug 2011 12:25:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from triad.knownspace (216-15-41-8.c3-0.gth-ubr1.lnh-gth.md.cable.rcn.com [216.15.41.8]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id h5sm4538769icy.21.2011.08.28.12.25.08 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sun, 28 Aug 2011 12:25:09 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <9202191F-FCF4-481C-8B8E-8870DB7AB31B@gmail.com> From: Justin Hibbits To: Garrett Cooper In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v936) Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2011 15:25:06 -0400 References: <4E5941D6.9090106@zedat.fu-berlin.de> <20110828184758.GA1189@tiny> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.936) 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-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2011 19:48:46 -0000 On Aug 28, 2011, at 3:15 PM, Garrett Cooper wrote: > On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 12:07 PM, Garrett Cooper =20 > wrote: >> On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 11:47 AM, Matthias Apitz =20= >> wrote: >>> El d=EDa Sunday, August 28, 2011 a las 07:27:49PM +0100, Chris Rees =20= >>> 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 =20 >>> "full of >>> vintage stuff", "agreed", "rather FUD", but without concrete =20 >>> critics or >>> 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 =20 >> 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 =20 >> 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. > > Thanks, > -Garrett Tiny nit on that: The linux community has made it clear (see GregKH's =20= many statements), that they will forever refuse to create a stable =20 ABI, for the express purpose of forcing hardware manufacturers to =20 submit to their will. - Justin