OG>> clients? Or Linux performance drops? If neither, then which side
OG>> screws up?
Just tell me, what do you expect of surwey that can't write even the
header right? They write "NT 3.5x" in the header and NT4 in the body...
And they constantly mix "unstable" with "low performance". Blah.
--
> No flames please. I'm sending this for info about the opposition. I just
> got this from our sys-admin (NT) with whom we conduct a lot of heated
> discussions about why we shouldn't use NT. These are the results of a
> study by MindCraft which was sponsored, amazingly enough, by Microsoft
> Corp
On Wed, Apr 14, 1999 at 07:32:45PM +0300, Yuval Elhanany wrote:
> No flames please. I'm sending this for info about the opposition. I just
> got this from our sys-admin (NT) with whom we conduct a lot of heated
> discussions about why we shouldn't use NT. These are the results of a
> study by Min
> The full report, including all of the details needed to reproduce
> the tests, is on Mindcraft's Web site at:
> http://www.mindcraft.com/whitepapers/nts4rhlinux.html.
Interesting. This URL
http://www.zdnet.com/sr/stories/issue/0,4537,2196106,00.html
was posted on this list some time ago, I
No flames please. I'm sending this for info about the opposition. I just
got this from our sys-admin (NT) with whom we conduct a lot of heated
discussions about why we shouldn't use NT. These are the results of a
study by MindCraft which was sponsored, amazingly enough, by Microsoft
Corp. (This ap
