[linux-elitists] Re: FW: MS claims w2k is better than solaris 8 (fwd)

John Goebel jgoebel@varesearch.com
Fri Feb 18 09:25:53 PST 2000

On Fri, Feb 18, 2000 at 09:06:10AM -0800, Deirdre Saoirse wrote:
> Occasionally, the Unix Rabbi (yes, he really IS a Rabbi) has something
> interesting to say even though he really only uses Solaris. See snipped
> post below. Interesting to see the rationale.
> Brian. Don't even go there.  Whenever M$ puts out benchmarks, performance
> stats, etc, what do we know about them?  They are wigged out to the max.  I
> know someone personally who used to conduct OS benchmarks for Compaq.  He
> was explicitly commanded there to make sure the test was rigged enough so
> that M$ always finished on top.  Why?  Because M$ Crap requires more
> resources, and thus, sells more hardware.

Yeah, I once had a hardware vendor tell me, after I asked about scaliblity in
NT as a httpd server, just to toss more hardware at it. What a load.

And on the benchmark thing, they are not the only ones to cook numbers and do
fake comparisons. Look esp. at network interface companys. Yuk. 

> I don't know the details of the 84%  ( I screwed you up by posting 86%
> earlier, btw ) findings, but I would bet a dollar to a doughnut that the
> reality is the exact opposite. Meaning, the Solaris equipment, software, and
> maintenance actually costs 84% of the TCO of the M$ crap, and performed 3x
> better.

Not. Solaris is *so* expensive, I can't see how this guy can make sure a
claim (unless your ceo of a multination is your sysadmin ;) ).


John Goebel					VA Linux Systems
jgoebel@valinux.com				408-542-8621
Key fingerprint 71 C1 94 9D 84 75 A2 20  BA E5 1E 6C D9 AB 4E 07

More information about the linux-elitists mailing list