James Mohr wrote:
On Sunday 18 May 2003 16:10, Stephen Allewell wrote:
If you read the report, the Windows server wasn't an out of the box install. It had been tweaked using various registry hacks, much out of the league of mom-n-pop shops. They also used a 64K file system block size, whereas, IIRC, the default for NTFS is 4K, just as with the ext3.
The whole point is that what was tested wasn't representative of what would be the default for a Windows server installation. So the comparison isn't valid.
Steve
A mom-n-pop shop doesn't care about kernel/registry tweaks. All they care about is ease of use and the "marketing" aspect of Windows being faster (valid or not). Microsoft plays down the fact that there are tweaks involved, just that it is "faster". If you only look at the first few pages of the report (which most people do anyway) you don't see anything about this. So for mom-n-pop, Windows is faster. It's not until you read the details (which mom-n-pop don't care about) that you find out the details. Sorry, I seriously doubt that mom-m-pop know what a block size even is, let alone what effect it has on the performance. The only effect it does have is to make them think Windows is faster. Windows "performance" is all in the marketing and thus better suited for the mom-n-pop shops.
Really quite logical when you look at it.
well....this all depends on how you look at it. Microsoft used a similar approach against Novell a few years back making winNT look faster on a network compared to a novell server. They purposely made windows listen for requests for novell servers, when they picked that up, they would put the the novell requests into a loop - not a continous loop, but a long enough time that the typical end-user would sense the delay. To the un-informed person.....windows seemed faster! This was documented in the anti-trust trial. Novell made MS aware of this immediately...now long did MS take to fix this? Approx. 2 years!! (not a coincidence!) By then, the damage was done.....people are so gullible! This is the kind of bullshit I hate about microsoft...these tactics they use! We must do a better job of educating people and making them aware of the truth! To me, the performance comparison is a fraud. It manipulates things to look a certain way, the way MS wants it to appear. But it's not the truth! I also don't like the fact the current american gov't (Bush admin) has turned a blind eye to MS's bullshit......I guess it's easy to do that when MS "contributes" [bribes, in my opinion] millions of dollars to the republicans! Last stat. I saw was around $4 million ..... so that's what it costs to "pay off" the anti-trust case...hmmmm.
Regards,
jimmo