Date: Tue, 3 Dec 1996 19:40:00 -0500 From: "David S. Miller" <davem@jenolan.rutgers.edu> To: jkh@time.cdrom.com Cc: lm@neteng.engr.sgi.com, dyson@freebsd.org, thorpej@nas.nasa.gov, dennis@etinc.com, kpneal@pobox.com, hackers@freebsd.org, torvalds@cs.helsinki.fi, lm@relay.engr.SGI.COM, iain@sbs.de, sparclinux@vger.rutgers.edu Subject: The real issue... Message-ID: <199612040040.TAA19311@jenolan.caipgeneral> In-Reply-To: <7860.849658577@time.cdrom.com> (jkh@time.cdrom.com)
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Date: Tue, 03 Dec 1996 16:16:17 -0800 From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com> Can we STOP THIS THREAD NOW PLEASE! No one has the friggin' balls to say it, but I will and this will be my last message, you can be sure of that. The thing the FreeBSD people are worried about, is that if they make publicly available whatever tools/benchmarks they use to measure the better performance they get in some way over other systems, they are afraid that the Linux people will pick it up and fix the problem. And then there will be nothing to be said anymore. Kind of sounds like the ball game commercial UNIX vendors play doesn't it? Proprietary pieces of code, under lock and key, and the hoarding of information to get competitive advantages. You no longer get the compliment of being called a pinhead by me for this. This is dirty pool. This is what they are concerned about. ---------------------------------------------//// Yow! 11.26 MB/s remote host TCP bandwidth & //// 199 usec remote TCP latency over 100Mb/s //// ethernet. Beat that! //// -----------------------------------------////__________ o David S. Miller, davem@caip.rutgers.edu /_____________/ / // /_/ ><
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199612040040.TAA19311>