Messages in this thread | | | From | "Edward Thomas" <> | Date | Tue, 18 May 1999 12:39:58 GMT | Subject | Re: A challenge to linux |
| |
Ramana Juvvadi <juvvadi@savera.com> writes: > Pavel Machek <pavel@bug.ucw.cz> writes: > > > Hi! > > > > Okay, then can show us we do not perform well enough in some hw > > configurations. Let them. I'd like to see the results, anyway. They > > may show we are 2 times slower than NT. In Microsoft's test I call it > > good result. > > > > Why don't we propose an alternate hardware configuration instead of accepting > the hardware they proposed. That way we project the image that we are > not backing down, but we are laying down terms for a fair test.
Doesn't Mindcraft 3 (aka, Return of the Penguin) also have a single CPU, 512 mb ram test too?
My main problem with their tests are the use of the Win95 clients (now Windows NT), and the use of Apache for a static webserver speed test (when Zeus has been shown to be up to 3 times faster serving static pages). The test should also be run at a slightly less biased site than ZD labs (though they have a lot to lose if they are shown to be biased) using off the shelf hardware and production drivers.
If I had my way then the test would also include a water pistol shootout between the Linux kernel team and the Microsoft board :-)
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |