RE: [MLUG - DISCUSSION] Windows 2003 66-95% faster the Linux

["Matthew Ross" <EMAIL:PROTECTED>]

> http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=9333
> 
> "Whether Windows Advanced Server 2003 will be able to keep up 
> the performance gap in other tasks is something that remains 
> to be seen. There's one thing that's for certain, you haven't 
> seen the end of tests like this. Microsoft has Linux in its 
> sights and is going to do everything it can to make the open 
> source upstart look like an also-ran."

Another thing, aside from all the other complaints, this is comparing windows serving in its own format to Linux putting up with windows format. IIRC, serving files via Samba to a windows network is fairly slow compared to serving files via other methods. If both were tested using apache server, then I'd be more inclined to trust the results, but as was pointed out, they're comparing an unreleased server with a server thats been out over a year, and is full of bloatware and doesn't use the best file system. Meanwhile the windows box probably didn't have the bloatware installed yet (aside from the OS itself). This is like saying the Tortoise is faster than the Hare, when you had to tranq the Hare so that the Tortoise could win.

_______________________________________________
discussion mailing list
EMAIL:PROTECTED
http://mlug.missouri.edu/mailman/listinfo/discussion