Re: Win NT article on Linux deficiencies

["Geoff Winans" <midngt@hotmail.com>]

Repost to this, looks like the standish group got embarrassed, and 
forced LT to take it off. :(

Oh well, it was funny.


>From: "Geoff Winans" <midngt@hotmail.com>
>To: linux-future@nl.linux.org
>Subject: Re: Win NT article on Linux deficiencies
>Date: Mon, 08 Mar 1999 19:07:56 PST
>Reply-To: linux-future@nl.linux.org
>
>You think that one is bad, you should see the one from LinuxToday and 
>the StandishGroup article. THAT was utter, pure, FUD!
>
>Right here,
>
>http://linuxtoday.com/stories/3825.html
>
>
>>Date: Mon, 8 Mar 1999 20:42:20 -0600
>>From: Charles Cazabon <charlesc-linuxmisc@qcc.sk.ca>
>>To: linux-future@nl.linux.org
>>Subject: Re: Win NT article on Linux deficiencies
>>Reply-To: linux-future@nl.linux.org
>>
>>Billy Harvey <Billy.Harvey@thrillseeker.net> wrote:
>>> Could the more knowledgeable take a look at this?
>>> 
>http://www.winntmag.com/Magazine/Article.cfm?IssueID=97&ArticleID=4502 
>>             ^^^^^^^^
>>> It almost looks like it was written after the discussion a couple of
>>> months ago about threads vs processes.  I'm particularly concerned
>>> about the accuracy, and hence acceptance as gospel by industry due 
to
>>> the source, of the concluding paragraph:
>>
>>Let's see -- they get how many millions of dollars a year in ad 
revenue
>>from MS?  And from the other vendors who rely on NT for the bulk of 
>their
>>revenue?
>>
>>And how much revenue do they derive from all commercial Linux 
>distributions
>>and applications?
>>
>>>       For the next couple
>>> 	of years, Linux is stuck with being a valid choice for
>>> 	only small uniprocessor servers. None but the most
>>> 	CPU-intensive Linux applications will scale past one
>>> 	CPU, which makes Linux unacceptable as a
>>> 	multiprocessor OS, and therefore as an enterprise-class OS.
>>
>>Linux may not scale as well as certain commercial Unices at the 
moment,
>>but NT is currently even less scalable.  If the whole article is as
>>accurate as this, just dismiss it as FUD.
>>
>>Charles
>>-- 
>>----------------------------------------------------
>>Charles Cazabon       <charlesc-linuxmisc@qcc.sk.ca>
>>Any opinions expressed are just that -- my opinions.
>>----------------------------------------------------
>>
>>-
>>Linux-future: thinking about the future of the Linux kernel
>>Archive:      http://humbolt.nl.linux.org/lists/
>>Wish list:    http://users.ox.ac.uk/~mert0236/linux-future.html
>>
>
>
>______________________________________________________
>Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
>-
>Linux-future: thinking about the future of the Linux kernel
>Archive:      http://humbolt.nl.linux.org/lists/
>Wish list:    http://users.ox.ac.uk/~mert0236/linux-future.html
>


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
-
Linux-future: thinking about the future of the Linux kernel
Archive:      http://humbolt.nl.linux.org/lists/
Wish list:    http://users.ox.ac.uk/~mert0236/linux-future.html