Actually I belive they did state at the bottom of the article that MS
funded the project. So rigged is the proper term. It probably wouldnt have
gotten the attention it did if they rigged it so they were a little closer
in results, with NT only winning "by a slight margin".
Franco Gasperino
On Wed, 14 Apr 1999, Alan Cox wrote:
> > <Sigh>. I really hate it when NT "wins" any kind of comparison,
> > especially one of this sort. Any remarks? Was this test fair or
> > "rigged" somehow?
>
> Rigged would be a polite term for it.
>
> These folks are infamous for pro microsoft hatchet jobs under the disguise
> of independant testing.
>
> "test independantly" but they don't even reveal the company
> ownership figures, declare members/directors
> and interests
> They don't detail the tests in full
> They don't say who funded the tests
>
> See their hysterical paper on "Solaris is 10 times more expensive than NT
> for a web server" (which achieves its aim by using a giant solaris
> box, and expensive products not apache/sendmail). Also see novell's
> response to their hatchett job on Netware.
>
> Mindcraft also provided evidence for Microsoft in the DoJ trial...
>
> Alan
>
> -
> Linux SMP list: FIRST see FAQ at http://www.irisa.fr/prive/mentre/smp-faq/
> To Unsubscribe: send "unsubscribe linux-smp" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
-
Linux SMP list: FIRST see FAQ at http://www.irisa.fr/prive/mentre/smp-faq/
To Unsubscribe: send "unsubscribe linux-smp" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
