> The Mindcraft test is a blatant attempt by MS just to discredit Linux
> and most non-Linux users that have even read about it will admit that.
> Most people who care do understand MS's way of doing business and do not
> consider it ethical.
Since when has MS been ethical, do you know the story of Stacker ?
Stac corp sued MS and won, MS few month later managed to buy
them.
>
> There are some obvious flaws in the Mindcraft test that very few people
> are talking about. That Windows users have pointed out.
>From the business view Benchmarks are ment to mark a product look good so
people will buy it.
> - Why is MS benchmarking NT 4.0 anymore? If 2000 is supposed to be
> out in the fall. Wouldn't you rather try and push that your new
> flagship product is better than Linux.
Because they realize it is too bloated.
> performance improvements. There is a patch to 2.2.8 that makes Apache
> 300% faster already. That would have taken MS about a year to get
> fixed.
I don't think many people really care, I go to novell users group
where they have problems with 5000 mail users where as linux I have
heard can handle 20000 well.
> Something to remember. When the TCP/IP stack debacle happened.
> - Linux's fix was available in a day or less.
> - The other *NIX's was available in less than 6 months.
> - MS's fix wasn't available for something like a year.
> That is if I recall correctly. Does anyone remember that incident.
> That would probably be a good Ask /. ?.
Few accualy care or understand security problems yet.
> I think that in some ways we should just ignore the NT 4.0 thing and
> concentrate on Linux against Windows 2000. MS has already said that 60%
> of apps are not going to run. Of course that is up to the individual
> software companies to fix that but the app playing field will be level
> for awhile.
> Except of course MS's own apps.
Which linux will beable to do things faster because it don't have the
same amount of junk loaded etc. apples and oranges.
>
> In the same category, 2000 is supposed to require a 300MHz cpu with a
> minimum of 64M to even run. How many businesses can actually upgrade to
> that all at one time. The cost would be phenomenal.
Well the year 2000 lawyer bills are going to be phenomenal, 2000 will
be a big hit in MS's sales of windows. Businesses can be dumb but
not that dumb. Many people where slow to take on 98, There where many
is 98 worth it? Articiles in computer mags.
It will be worse for 2000, Even MS is being slow for bringing out
win 2000 as seen in the benchmarks.
I deal with windows users who I only see to fix their machine
every 3 or 6 months. Some of them I am thinking of, here is linux
it is new a bit harder to use more complex, but it works.
The fact that it works and problems can befixed and explained
useally is a BIG thing. Fact is people want something that
works and don't stop working.
I want to see more then
college kids and sys admins using linux.
ps reply directly to me.
die thread die
---
This message was automatically sent by the Linux Demo Days mailing list
To remove yourself from this list, email [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with the "unsubcribe" in your message body.
