Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 09:58:46 05/21/02
Go up one level in this thread
On May 21, 2002 at 12:04:15, Daniel Clausen wrote: >On May 21, 2002 at 11:28:44, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: > >[snip] > >>>Actually what the world needs is a low priced Windows clone. It's not very >>>important if the OS core is Linux or NT (they look quite similar to me). >> >>Note even close. NT is in every aspect better than linux except for 2 >> a) it is free >> b) source code is available > >I wouldn't mind this statement, Vincent, if you'd add "in my opinion" at the >end. There are many people who believe otherwise and they're not necessarily >the most stupid people in the world.. > >I don't intend to start a flamewar here. I just want to point out that "NT is >better than Linux in almost every aspect" is merely an opinion, not a proved >fact. You can proof it also. Let's talk about shared memory issues with linux, which windows doesn't have. All kind of things in manual pages which are still not implemented in it. The scheduler takes 2 times longer than windows one. It runs stable only just like that on 4 processors. 8 is question to me, but with some luck you hear now and then reports it booted at 8. But it won't run on 32 processors (shared memory machine) for example. NT does. There are so many issues with linux kernels. Of course i'm not comparing it with a 'pro' edition from NT. The thing is $$$$$$ of course, but it delivers more performance, which can be objectively shown. Obviously i can understand many companies which say: "why the hell pay so much more for windoze, i already pay a sysadmin who can figure out linux for me". But there is nothing such as 'in my opinion here'. >Sargon
This page took 0.02 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.