[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Linux vs Windows

On Thu, 2003-05-15 at 08:16, David Fokkema wrote:
> Hi group,
> I'm not looking for a flamewar, nor do I want this thread to become an
> outlet for all kinds of ass* opinions. I am being very serious about
> this. Really.
> So, apparantly, apache holds about 60 percent of the internet server
> market and microsoft's iis only about 30. Furthermore, apache is faster,
> more stable and more secure. Furthermore, un*x (with for example qmail)
> can handle more mails per day with a lower system load and fewer (read
> none) mails are being lost. Basically, un*x (or just the BSDs and linux)
> is faster, more stable and more secure. AND free. Or so I am led to
> believe...
> According to www.unixsucks.com (why did I go there in the first place?),
> which has a lot of reference links, this is all not true. I could've LOLed,
> flamed this guy and ignored his site, but I didn't. I looked up the
> references. I'm particularly bothered about the Fortune 1000 net survey
> and the mindcraft benchmark of redhat vs winnt. I read the whole story,
> they did three tests. And what's more, win2000 seems to be stable.
> Any thoughts on this? Or (perhaps) better, a site with a lot of
> reference links which 'proves' the opposite?

Like most people, he cherry-picks his facts.  Of course, the site *is*
unixsucks, not linuxsucks, so it's totally ok to say
  Win2k+J2EE is faster than Solaris+J2EE
(Of course, it's not just a joke why Slowlaris is named that way.)

The Fortune 1000 graph is meaninless, since shows popularity, not why
Apache or IIS is better than the other.

While the Mindcraft benchmarks were extremely useful in highlighting 
some problems in Linux & Samba, it was also shown to be rigged: highly
tuned Windows vs. un-tuned Linux.  (Sorta like the recent VeriTest

| Ron Johnson, Jr.        mailto:ron.l.johnson@cox.net          |
| Jefferson, LA  USA      http://members.cox.net/ron.l.johnson  |
|                                                               |
| The purpose of the military isn't to pay your college tuition |
| or give you a little extra income; it's to "kill people and   |
| break things".  Surprisingly, not everyone understands that.  |

Reply to: