From owner-freebsd-advocacy Tue Jun 29 13:23:41 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from fed-ef1.frb.gov (fed.frb.gov [132.200.32.32]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E4CD14D73 for ; Tue, 29 Jun 1999 13:23:24 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from seth@freebie.dp.ny.frb.org) Received: by fed-ef1.frb.gov; id QAA17106; Tue, 29 Jun 1999 16:23:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: from m1pmdf.frb.gov(192.168.3.38) by fed.frb.gov via smap (V4.2) id xma016961; Tue, 29 Jun 99 16:23:01 -0400 Date: Tue, 29 Jun 1999 16:22:57 -0400 (EDT) From: Seth Subject: Re: [Linux vs. NT, take 2.] In-reply-to: <199906292016.NAA24314@usr08.primenet.com> To: Terry Lambert Cc: Jonathan Walther , jesus.monroy@usa.net, advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Tue, 29 Jun 1999, Terry Lambert wrote: > > Talk to Mike Smith. FreeBSD's numbers are worse than Linux's. > Is there any validity to the discussion on -hackers that real-world application performance doesn't corroborate the poor benchmark results (as far as FreeBSD is concerned)? I'm less concerned that benchmarks aren't good than I am that my application performance suffers relative to other platforms. SB To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message