Linux-Advocacy Digest #4, Volume #27 Sat, 10 Jun 00 03:13:03 EDT
Contents:
Re: Microsoft migrates Hotmail to W2K (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: What else is hidden in MS code??? ("Drestin Black")
Re: OSWars 2000 at www.stardock.com ("Quantum Leaper")
Re: Canada invites Microsoft north (John Wiltshire)
Re: Canada invites Microsoft north (John Wiltshire)
Re: Canada invites Microsoft north (Bob Germer)
Re: Canada invites Microsoft north (Bob Germer)
Re: Canada invites Microsoft north ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Canada invites Microsoft north (abraxas)
CA24074E Visio for Linux ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Open Source Programmers Demonstrate Incompetence ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Canada invites Microsoft north (Marty)
Re: Linux faster than Windows? (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linux faster than Windows? (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linux faster than Windows? (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linux faster than Windows? (Pete Goodwin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft migrates Hotmail to W2K
Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2000 04:11:43 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Michael Marion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote on Sat, 10 Jun 2000 02:23:21 GMT <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
>
>> of switch to allow for the computer to control the power supply,
>> rather than the user. Simply put, the power switch is treated as
>> though it were a suggestion. :-)
>
>Most HP boxes (HP Unix boxes that is) have this. You hit the power switch and
>it runs a shutdown first. Very cool IMO. However, if it hangs on shutdown..
>you have to yank the power cord.
Yep, but it's still pretty cool. :-)
[.sigsnip]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- hmm...computers protecting themselves from
idiot users. One wonders... :-)
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: What else is hidden in MS code???
Date: 9 Jun 2000 23:24:10 -0500
"Rob S. Wolfram" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >"Rob S. Wolfram" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> First, how is this a back door? I never made any claim about bugs,
> >> security wise or not. I made a claim about back doors. So let me
> >> challenge you. I can sell you the official version of Debian GNU/Linux
> >> (stable a.k.a. slink, this is 2 binary CD's and 2 source CD's and
> >> constitute *only* DFSG free software) for the amount of US$5000.00 This
> >> contains 2200 packages of free software. If you can find even *one*
> >> backdoor in any of those packages, I'll return you triple the amount.
> >> Oh, and selling you this software without support or manuals for such
an
> >> amount is perfectly legal. Wanna play?
> >
> >oooooo, lesse, so, for $5000 you'll give me all this stuff and invite me
to
> >find any backdoor in any of these 2200 packages. One single backdoor in
any
> >of these and you'll pay me $15,000?
> >
> >if this is right, I would like to have my attorney write this up and send
it
> >to you. OK?
>
> Yep. Let them start writing it up, then I'll let mine review it and I
> get back to you. Oh, and it would be nice to inform the groups of the
> conditions the lawyers wrote up.
Of course, we can post a PDF of the documents.
>
> >Oh, and we'll do it this way: I'll put $5000 in an escrow account and YOU
> >will put $15,000 in that same escrow account (drawing interest in your
> >favor, of course, you can even keep the interest afterwards).
>
> Nope. I said I *sell* it to you. Put up or shut up.
My attorney told me that's what would happen. As soon as you are serious and
real money is involved, the other party either comes to the table or fades.
When you can anty up, let me know.
>
> >Just so we
> >know we're all serious here. All we need to do is find any thing that is
a
> >backdoor (and since you claim the FP97 dll thingy is a backdoor, I just
need
> >to look for someplace where someone wrote something similar to "netscape
> >engineers are weenies" backwards and that will qualify) and I get the
> >$15,000 plus my original $5,000. Oh, and the results will be published
here.
>
> Please point me to an article on Deja where I said that the FP thingy
> was a backdoor? In both <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I may be wrong but I believe you were replying to a thread, siding with it,
about the ludicrous claim that the string found in a FP97 DLL was in fact a
backdoor.
> I challenged you to proove the
> absence of a backdoor in Frontpage (which you never did), but I never
> claimed that there *was* a backdoor.
As I said, I may have that wrong. However, asking me to prove there is NOT a
backdoor is impossible. How can you prove something like that doesn't exist?
I mean, I can point to it right now and say: "Look, no backdoors" and my
claim stands 100% accurate unless you can disprove it. So, in fact, I CAN
prove there is not a backdoor in Frontpage. See, I tried and couldn't get
in. Now, if I'm wrong you'll just show me this backdoor, right?
Back to the topic at hand, I just have to find a "backdoor" (we'll have to
set a definition here, because according to linux advocates in COLA who were
all over this FP thing, a "backdoor" to them is equal to finding a
suspeciously worded string within a DLL. I'll go for "backdoor" equaling a
suspeciously worded string within any of these apps, will you?) in any of
these 2000 apps... course with $15,000 up for grabs, maybe I'll just ask for
some help... are you SURE you did your web search, you might wanna do one
again before you join in, I found it interesting, you might not :)
> I did claim, however, that the
> Active Setup "feature" as explained in Cryptogram and the "debug" userid
> with password "synnet" on 3Com Stackbuilders are backdoors.
Yea, great, nothing to do with this topic though.
>
> >Wanna play?
>
> Oh, yes I do.
>
Me too - anty up!
------------------------------
From: "Quantum Leaper" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.be.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: OSWars 2000 at www.stardock.com
Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2000 04:33:46 GMT
"Chris Wenham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "Quantum Leaper" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Alot pre Pentium computer have broke because of
> > Y2K. I know of a 1/2 dozen examples off the top of my head.
>
> That's very interesting. What were some of these examples?
>
Most pre Pentium computer don't roll over correctly, most require a manual
setting of the clock.
A backup program would back up any thing created after Y2K. I beleive it was
an inhouse program. They switched software.
An inventory program decided since it was '1900' , dumped the 'to be
shipped' queue. Lucky they backup all the data, it took 3 weeks to get
everything shipped out and fixed. My friend loved the overtime but his boss
was mad.
All the software at a friends work place was upgraded, they weren't sure
which would work and which ones wouldn't but it looked like about 50/50,
that was on a Unix box.
The accounting software at a friend place, decided that it was Y2K, all the
bill printed over the weekend, were from 1900, and he thought it was
fixed. He did all account receiveable printing at night, so they could be
mailed the next day.
A hardware control program used to control lighting, in the building,
turned on all the lights. It took 2 weeks to get a software upgrade.
If I'm all vague on the details, it my memory, it been more that 6 months,
and none of the above directly evolved me. All of them were from friends.
------------------------------
From: John Wiltshire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Canada invites Microsoft north
Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2000 05:00:40 GMT
On Fri, 09 Jun 2000 12:36:07 GMT, Bob Germer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>You are a worthless, useless, stupid, dense liar. I wrote the
>line which you attribute to Lund. I wrote it in a reply to one of
>your stupid, baseless, lies.
No. That's wrong. I've checked through my outbox, and my archive of
the newsgroup and I've always attributed the 'If the MAC OS was
superior...' line to you. Can you please post or mail me your copy of
the article I wrote which you believe was attributed incorrectly? At
least if you are going to call me a liar, have some proof.
>Here is the entire message where the line originated:
>
>On 06/04/2000 at 11:59 AM,
> John Wiltshire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
>> This is true from a core OS point of view. From a UI point of view
>> (which is what I was talking about), MacOS has continued to go forward.
>> OS 7 -> OS 8 -> OS 9 were all pretty decent steps in UI terms even if
>> the core OS never really changed.
>
>If the MAC OS was superior to those available for the Intel platform, it
>would be dominant. It was rejected by the marketplace.
>
>--
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
>MR/2 Ice 2.19zf Registration Number 67
That's correct. I've never said differently.
>That asshole is where the line originated. Not from someone else.
I assume you left out commas and mean "That, asshole, is where the
line originated" - I figure you don't usually refer to yourself as
"That asshole". ;-)
I also agree that the line originated from you and have never
attributed it to anyone else. If you believe I have then you are
mistaken - I checked.
>Now either post an abject apology or shut the hell up and to away.
I'll apologize if you can show me the article (post it here, or the
reference to it) which you claim I've attributed incorrectly. I've
searched the articles I've posted and none of them are wrong. If you
are so adamant that I've posted incorrectly then please post a copy of
the article so I can fix my newsreader rather than just calling me
names.
>You are an infantile MAC supporter who has not business here
>in the first place. This is an OS/2 advocacy newsgroup. As bad
>as wintrolls are, you are orders of magnitude more obnoxious,
>rude, stupid, and arrogant. Go have sex with a platypus. That's
>about your speed anyway.
Heh.
i) I'm not a Mac supporter. I'm a Windows NT supporter but leave an
open mind to Linux and MacOS even though I consider them inferior at
the moment.
ii) Surely OS/2 advocacy involves the analysis of the flaws of other
operating systems (including MacOS and Windows) and debate on their
relative merits. If you check the headers, you'll find I posted from
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy anyhow so your point is rather moot.
iii) I don't believe I've ever been very obnoxious, rude or arrogant
in this group, or at least that I haven't apologized for. I've often
been called stupid for my view that NT/2000 is a better solution that
other systems but that's a subjective matter.
iv) You seem to think platypuses are slow. Guess you've never seen
one and don't realize how incredibly quick you'd have to be to try to
be intimate with one. Either that or it was a compliment and if so,
thanks. :-)
John Wiltshire
------------------------------
From: John Wiltshire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Canada invites Microsoft north
Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2000 05:02:17 GMT
On Fri, 09 Jun 2000 00:40:43 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>That's interesting --- considering that *my* high school teacher,
>instead of making up weird and pointless stories, had us read Marx'
>and Lenin's original texts, and discuss them. It probably was much
>less amusing, but I am sure it provided for a much better understand
>of what communism and socialism are, and how they relate to each other.
Just curious, what are you views on the differences? Something I've
wondered for a while.
John Wiltshire
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: Bob Germer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Canada invites Microsoft north
Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2000 05:14:17 GMT
On 06/09/2000 at 09:21 PM,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mike Stephen) said:
> You really should try NT to replace OS/2. You will find the people in
> the NT newsgroups more to your taste. Could you also take Tim Martin
> with you? Hmmmmmm With both of you gone, this area would
> flourish....
As bad as Tim Martin is, he is much preferable to you.
--
==============================================================================================
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice 2.19zf Registration Number 67
=============================================================================================
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: Bob Germer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Canada invites Microsoft north
Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2000 05:14:57 GMT
On 06/09/2000 at 09:44 PM,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> Is Bob Germer really *worth* the time and attention you are devoting to
> him, Mike? The only "stereotype" Germer fits is the stereotype
> depicted in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of the American
> Psychiatric Association. See "paranoid," any subtype. Hostile,
> belligerent, overbearing, obsessive and grandiose.
Karen fits the definition of assinine, idiot, whiny bitch, and a dozen
other worthless types.
-
==============================================================================================
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice 2.19zf Registration Number 67
=============================================================================================
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Canada invites Microsoft north
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2000 05:30:31 GMT
In <3941cf1d$2$obot$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Bob Germer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>On 06/09/2000 at 09:44 PM,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
>
>> Is Bob Germer really *worth* the time and attention you are devoting to
>> him, Mike? The only "stereotype" Germer fits is the stereotype
>> depicted in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of the American
>> Psychiatric Association. See "paranoid," any subtype. Hostile,
>> belligerent, overbearing, obsessive and grandiose.
>
>Karen fits the definition of assinine, idiot, whiny bitch, and a dozen
>other worthless types.
You could do with a bit of instruction on basic correct English
usage as well.
Karen
Where do I want to go today?
I want to go where *I* want to go,
Not where MS wants to send me.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas)
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Canada invites Microsoft north
Date: 10 Jun 2000 06:08:10 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> abraxas wrote:
>>
>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Bob Germer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > On 06/09/2000 at 08:59 PM,
>> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas) said:
>>
>> >> I dont run windows by the way, or OS2. In case you thought you were
>> >> getting my goat or something. :)
>>
>> > Then there are only 2 possibilities. You are running a MAC which is
>> > nothing more than a glorified Playstation or you are running some form of
>> > unix which makes your machine virtually useless for 99.98% of business
>> > customers.
>>
>> I could be running BeOS, or RISCOS, or Workbench, etc. on a variety of
>> systems, etc.
>>
>> Tell me once again how useful OS/2 is for business customers.
> Been to any banks lately?
You may have had a point about 3 years ago. :)
=====yttrx
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: CA24074E Visio for Linux
Date: Sat,10 Jun 2000 00:12:09+2000
Embrace the new Standard in Computer Aided design - Linux CAD !
Linux CAD is an original independently designed program runs on new
advanced Linux Operating system.
Complex design and graphics are created with ease and elegance.
Linux CAD erases difficulties of Microsoft Visio and goes head to
head with AutoCAD.
Our improved introductory packageis only $99.00 and we provide
and custom design symbol libraries appropriate for your projects.
www. l i n u x c a d .com
www. s o f t w a r e f o r g e .com
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Open Source Programmers Demonstrate Incompetence
Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2000 06:11:48 GMT
As most computer professionals know, "open source" software has a
reputation for being extremely unreliable, buggy, and prone to constant
failure. Of course, since the source code is available, one need only
look at it to see how devastatingly bad it is. Sourceforge has a
service where programmers are allowed to share their work with others.
One such contribution is the following, which allows an fgets-like
function to read from a file descriptor:
#define BUFLEN 4096
void dprintf(int fd, char *format, ...)
{
va_list arglist;
char buffer[BUFLEN];
va_start(arglist, format);
vsnprintf(buffer, BUFLEN, format, arglist);
va_end(arglist);
write(fd, buffer, strlen(buffer));
}
Copyright 2000 by "Zaf". Licensed under GPL.
The author does not document that the function has a 4K limit. When
innocent programmers use it, they will be baffled why it always cuts
off after 4K. But that's not the point: it is _trivial_ for a competent
programmer to extend this to work with strings of arbitrary length. Any
programmer who has even the slightest experience at all, would be able
to achieve this with ease. Of course, one wonders what insight this
function gives at all - it is basically straight off the the stdarg man
page, which any programmer who has even glanced at any code at all, is
already familiar with.
Next, we have the case of the programmer who wanted to reverse every
line in a file:
for ( ; position > -1 ; position--) {
/* seek to the proper position and read in a character */
if(fseek(stream, position, SEEK_SET)) {
printf("Failed to fseek to the current file position.\n");
exit (1);
}
if((value=fgetc(stream))==EOF) {
printf("Failed to read a character from the current file
position.\n");
exit (1);
}
/* if the character is a newline then print the accumulated
stack*/
if(value=='\n'){
while (stack = pop(stack, &x)){
printf("%c", x);
}
stack = push(stack, '\n');
}
/* push the character onto the stack */
stack = push(stack, value);
}
/* print the first line to finish up */
while (stack = pop(stack, &x)){
printf("%c", x);
}
Copyright 2000 by "buckrogers". Licensed by GPL.
This programmer does an fseek (!), a malloc, an fgetc, a push (which
allocates no fewer than 8 bytes per input byte), a pop, and a printf
for each _character_ in the stream! Most professional programmers would
cringe of the idea of calling six expensive functions for a large
input, especially when the concept is so simple. Indeed, one wonders
why he didn't just mmap the file, and go through it backwards, which
would not only be about a hundred times faster in run time, but simpler
to test and code.
These, of course, are just code snippets. But one really has to wonder -
if the Linux community cannot get trivial functions to work properly,
reliably, and efficiently, how can we possibly expect them to get the
complex things right? Indeed, Mozilla, which is very possibly the
slowest computer program ever created, was probably written by a whole
army of open source zealots who would use 6 expensive function calls
per character in a large input stream to reverse a file. Linux crashes
so much because code like the first quoted function is all over the
kernel. The rest of the apps are prone to constant failure because of
their own miscellaneous failings. Obviously, as these examples show,
the community is not to be trusted to produce the best software.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Canada invites Microsoft north
Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2000 06:42:34 GMT
abraxas wrote:
>
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > abraxas wrote:
> >>
> >> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Bob Germer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> > On 06/09/2000 at 08:59 PM,
> >> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas) said:
> >>
> >> >> I dont run windows by the way, or OS2. In case you thought you were
> >> >> getting my goat or something. :)
> >>
> >> > Then there are only 2 possibilities. You are running a MAC which is
> >> > nothing more than a glorified Playstation or you are running some form of
> >> > unix which makes your machine virtually useless for 99.98% of business
> >> > customers.
> >>
> >> I could be running BeOS, or RISCOS, or Workbench, etc. on a variety of
> >> systems, etc.
> >>
> >> Tell me once again how useful OS/2 is for business customers.
>
> > Been to any banks lately?
>
> You may have had a point about 3 years ago. :)
Surely you've been to a bank since then.
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Linux faster than Windows?
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin)
Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2000 06:51:05 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert) wrote in
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>A six second test doesn't prove shit.
You're the guy who claimed Linux is three times faster than Windows. Now,
granted my test is not perfect, I would have thought to see Linux running
faster than Windows. At best I think I can say your claim of a three fold
speed increase is suspect.
Pete
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Linux faster than Windows?
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin)
Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2000 06:52:43 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gary Hallock) wrote in
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>Pete Goodwin wrote:
>Actually, you are really only testing disk IO. There is nothing in the
>code to optimize. Try removing the file IO. The time spent in the code
>is too small to measure.
>
>I ran it multiple times without problems.
Was that with or without the disk I/O?
One of the claims made here was the Linux file system is so much better
than Windows - yet this test reveals they're about the same.
Incidentally, I saw the same system slowdown on Windows 98 SE as I did on
Linux.
Pete
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Linux faster than Windows?
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin)
Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2000 06:57:40 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine) wrote in
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Pete Goodwin
>If you're going to do a decent benchmark, then go get a
>decent benchmark. Dhrystone comes to mind, although that is
>a CPU benchmark, as opposed to a disk I/O throughput one.
>But there should be one out there somewhere. I'd have to look.
Yes thanks for reminding me, I remember Dhrystone, I'll see if I can find
it.
>All the above benchmark does is test sequential disk access speed,
>at best -- and that's controlled by the head position on the platter
>(modern drives have more sectors on the outer rings than the inner)
>and the rotational speed ONLY. Timings the same? Of course they
>are; the bottleneck is the hardware!
Sequential disk access was something I wanted to test - is Linux faster
than Windows or not? The answer appears to be they're about the same.
>The speed may also be highly dependent on the amount of memory on
>the system (it generates a 31,000,000-byte file), what else the
>system is running, the fragmentation of the disk, and whether the
>pages are queued up in memory prior to actual writeout, but written
>*after* the program quits. In an ideal case, the program would
>take absolutely no time to run, fill up those 31 megs of RAM,
>and then exit; the system would then write them out. (This may
>explain your lit disk light, as that's the kernel writing the
>dirty pages out -- and the benchmark generated a lot of them.)
>I'm not saying Linux does this, of course, but it sure looks
>like it does. (There's a graphical utility called xosview that
>might be of assistance here, as well; it has, among other displays,
>a graphical indicator of how much memory is in use, and how much
>memory is cached.)
It's the same system - it's dual bootable, both Windows 98 SE and Linux
Mandrake 7.0. I've done no tweaking to either system.
I'll try to run the test with xosview or top running and see what else
happens - 'course I can't even do that on Windows 98 SE, as there's no good
way to monitor processes - though maybe System Monitor might help.
>The two runs I did try on my system (which is a P200/64MB
>with Adaptec SCSI and 10 MB/s drives, and was heavily loaded doing
>a write to a removable with apparently developing badspots) showed
>a 12 second and a 9 second timing, respectively. Considering that
>your timing has a 1-second resolution, the benchmark isn't all that
>good, although it's about as simple as one can get. (And yes,
>I'm being slightly sloppy.)
The best way to run a benchmark is to run it several times. This I haven't
done but will do. It will be interesting to see what results I get then.
Pete
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Linux faster than Windows?
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin)
Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2000 07:00:55 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in <8hse0u$2tu$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>Excellent coding style. Obviously, you are an ex-DEC'cie. :-) Excellent
>musical taste also.
8)
>With all due respect, this is not a very interesting test. The main
>thing it tests, by far, is the file cache. I ran this on my Alpha with
>VMS, and it took just under 6 _minutes_ to complete. As you may know,
>VMS uses a write-through disk cache, which accounts for the difference.
>(The fact that it wrote the file to a network disk on an old VAX didn't
>help either!)
6 minutes with an Alpha! OUCH! I'd have thought Alpha's would run much
faster than that. Perhaps you ought to try Alpha-Linux or Digital UNIX?
>I have tested benchmarks on my computers, both Linux vs. VMS on Alpha
>hardware (using DEC's compiler), and Linux vs. Windows on Intel
>hardware (using Microsoft's compiler). In both cases, Linux lost by a
>very wide margin due to its toy compiler - by up to 50% on some of the
>tests. A lot of Linux zelaots may not realize it, but when you use
>Linux, and have compiled your programs with GCC, you are getting much
>less out of your hardware than if you the software you run is built
>with a good compiler.
That is interesting, Linux is _slower_ than Windows 98 SE. So much for the
outrageous claims of a three fold speed increase!
Pete
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.advocacy) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Advocacy Digest
******************************
