On Friday, 25 January 2019 14:01 Liam Proven wrote:
It would drive further difference between SLE* and openSUSE. Whether that is a good or a bad thing is not my call.
I do not like to see this Phoronix-bashing. It is a useful and valuable site, as the only one in the *large* field of PC performance comparison sites and communities which is Linux-based. The Linux world _needs_ this. If we Linux users wish to see Linux continue to make headway against Windows, then sites like this are _necessary_.
If someone spends their own money on computers, then they want to know which are fast and which are slow, which are better or worse value for money. There *are* differences.
(For instance, I personally avoid all "Celeron", "Pentium Dual Core" and other cut-down CPUs. I'd rather have an older, faster model. Others opinions differ; for instance, if someone routinely overclocks their hardware.)
As well as differences between makes and models, there are also differences between performance under Windows and under Linux -- obviously.
Phoronix is the _only_ site doing such comparisons.
That is a valuable service.
It _would_ be a valuable service if the numbers presented had some meaning. They don't. Unfortunately, Michael Larabel, after all those years he is running the site still didn't learn a bit and didn't get any further than any beginner who just runs some program and writes the numbers that fell out of it into a nice table. And that's just sad. That's not "deriding", that's how it is. Doing benchmarsks properly is hard, it requires a lot of knowledge and lot of experience. You need knowledge and experience to know how to set up the test systems, how prevent unrelated effects, how to analyze and interpret the results. We have a whole team of skilled engineers just for performance evaluation of our kernels. What can you expect from some self-appointed guy flooding his site with tons of articles on various aspects of the whole distribution? Not much - and Phoronix provides even less than that. Sure, running a web doing meaningful performance comparison of (not only) Linux distributions would cost a lot of manpower and therefore also a lot of money with no clear idea how to make it profitable. But let's face it: Phoronix is so doing job so terrible that having no site would be much better option. Because the value of the misleading information it provides is _negative_, it's misinformation.
If, perhaps, aspects of the design of openSUSE make it seem slower in benchmarks, either on first boot or in general, well, that is going to make it seem less appealing to people who want to get more performance out of their hardware by running Linux instead of Windows.
That being the case, there's only one answer: eliminate those performance differentials. Make it faster.
So we are supposed to stop providing preconfigured firewall just to make us look better in some tables of pseudorandom numbers some moron decided to put on his site (which other morons interpret as "openSUSE is slow"? While I'm not using this preconfigured firewall on any of my systems, I would still oppose ditching it for reason as stupid as making us look better in Phoronix "benchmarks". Michal Kubecek -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org