From owner-freebsd-chat Sat Jun 16 20: 3:32 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from beastie.saturn-tech.com (beastie.saturn-tech.com [207.229.19.136]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A1A037B403 for ; Sat, 16 Jun 2001 20:03:28 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from drussell@saturn-tech.com) Received: from localhost (drussell@localhost) by beastie.saturn-tech.com (8.11.1/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f5H58hK30020; Sat, 16 Jun 2001 23:08:43 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from drussell@saturn-tech.com) X-Authentication-Warning: beastie.saturn-tech.com: drussell owned process doing -bs Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2001 23:08:43 -0600 (MDT) From: Doug Russell To: Jonathan Fortin Cc: freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Article Network performance by OS In-Reply-To: <006701c0f6b9$dd6d89e0$3fac6395@alink> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Sat, 16 Jun 2001, Jonathan Fortin wrote: > As for the benchmark briefly, It's biased because whoever did it knew fuck > nothing about Unix and Linux doesnt need tuning so Linux won period. > Linux is tuned out of the box, where the others are tuned for stability. People can say any OS is 'tuned' out of the box, but TUNED FOR WHAT? One of the best things about BSD (or Unix in general, etc.) is the configurability, tunability, tweakability. Far, far too much has been lost over the years in an OS like Windows in the name of simplicity, or "User Friendliness", that the OS becomes virtually useless to those who know what they are doing. Sure you can stick any cloned bag of cells in front of the machine, and they can probably make it go, but make it do what you really WANT? Good luck. :) Later...... To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message