On Wed, Jun 23, 1999 at 11:24:03PM -0400, Brian F. Feldman wrote: > On Wed, 23 Jun 1999, Garance A Drosihn wrote: > > > At 4:39 PM +0930 6/23/99, Greg Lehey wrote: > > >On Tuesday, 22 June 1999 at 23:52:25 -0700, Mike Smith wrote: > > >> [someone said] > > >>| [someone said] > > >>|> Ok, so let's follow Microsoft's industry-leading documentation > > >>|> standards. > > >>| > > >>| He said "commercial", not "toy". > > >> > > >> Given that I've just spent a very unhappy couple of weeks > > >> demonstrating that this "toy" you're referring to outperforms > > >> us by a factor of anything from 3 to 10 on a range of basic > > >> benchmarks, > > > > > > Really? This is so different from anything I've heard that I'm > > > astounded. How about some details? > > > > I also found Mike's comment on performance interesting. I assume > > he's talking about system performance, and not documentation > > performance. Was this when testing WinNT-2000, or just the latest > > service pack on WinNT 4? > > s/interesting/unbelievable/g and you've got my reaction. This makes so little > sense that I can't even imagine it.
Me too. I've found FreeBSD to outperform NT-anything in any task you throw at the machine from web service to Samba for file and print service for PCs running Windows. Its more stable too; the stability is a free "bonus" that comes at no extra charge :-). -- -- Karl Denninger (k...@denninger.net) Web: fathers.denninger.net I ain't even *authorized* to speak for anyone other than myself, so give up now on trying to associate my words with any particular organization. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
