From: Martin Schlemmer <azarah@gentoo.org>
To: jimwclark@ntlworld.com
Cc: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Driver Model 2 Proposal - Linux Kernel Performance v Usability
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 20:59:33 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1062788373.3371.32.camel@workshop.saharacpt.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200309051931.09491.jimwclark@ntlworld.com>
On Fri, 2003-09-05 at 20:31, James Clark wrote:
> Valdis Kletnieks wrote:
>
> > So if 500 million people are productive 60% of the time and hosed 40% of
> > the time, and 5 million people are productive 95% of the time, the 60/40
> > model is better because 60% of 500M is more than 95% of 5M?
>
> This is a good example of the kind of rubbish that is sometimes talked around
> here. I've lost count of the number of times I've heard the 'Windows is SO
> unstable argument' it almost seems like a religion. I would agree with what
> you have said if Windows was actually unusable 40% of the time. Do you really
> believe this figure? In reality it is much better than that as plainly the
> majority of the WORLD are using it. I love Linux but I also use Windows.
> Sorry to break your delusion, it ain't that bad.
>
> > Ask Joe User how he feels about NOT being able to add IPv6 support to
> > his existing system until his vendor says they'll do it for him, and then
> > look at when Linux had support.
>
> Its very true that in the Windows world you have to wait for Micro$oft
> sometimes, it is even true that they probably hold back features so that can
> put them in the next release and get you to pay for them. Why is this any
> worse than expecting Joe User, who is a 'user' and not a 'developer' to
> rebuild the most important bits of his OS and risk breaking the whole lot.
>
> This is not about Windows v Linux so please stop compraring what I have
> proposed to Windows. This debate should be about Performance v Usability.
> Source interfaces have ultimate performance, nobody has suggested, yet, that
> they are easier for Joe User than a binary interface.
>
Right. Not trying to get involved in this mess [8)], but there
was a few other comments that was less linux/windows, but more
valid ... what about responding to them? Could be interesting
to hear what you have to say ...
> James
>
>
>
> On Friday 05 Sep 2003 6:52 pm, you wrote:
> > On Thu, 04 Sep 2003 22:51:38 BST, James Clark said:
> > > FUD. It mostly works, sometimes it doesn't, but in total the number of
> > > working hours of PRODUCTIVE use from it is many orders of magnitude
> > > greater. Multiple the number of Windows users in the world by their
> > > working time and then do the same for Linux!
> >
> > So if 500 million people are productive 60% of the time and hosed 40% of
> > the time, and 5 million people are productive 95% of the time, the 60/40
> > model is better because 60% of 500M is more than 95% of 5M?
> >
> > What's wrong with this picture?
> >
> > > hence the OS could escape the niche box it currently is in. Please ask
> > > Joe User how he feels about rebuilding his whole OS to add IP6 support to
> > > an existing stable system etc.
> >
> > Ask Joe User how he feels about NOT being able to add IPv6 support to
> > his existing system until his vendor says they'll do it for him, and then
> > look at when Linux had support.
> >
> > http://www.ipv6.org/impl/linux.html
> > http://www.ipv6.org/impl/windows.html
> >
> > And most important, google around for +ipv6 +"craig metz", and look at when
> > *he* did the IPv6 work - and you were free to put the patches on your
> > system as soon as he posted them.
> >
> > Now as you were saying?
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
--
Martin Schlemmer
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-09-05 19:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 47+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <1062637356.846.3471.camel@cube>
2003-09-04 20:14 ` Driver Model 2 Proposal - Linux Kernel Performance v Usability James Clark
2003-09-04 20:27 ` Mike Fedyk
2003-09-04 21:16 ` James Clark
2003-09-04 21:50 ` Mike Fedyk
2003-09-04 22:10 ` insecure
2003-09-04 22:01 ` jdow
2003-09-04 20:29 ` Rik van Riel
2003-09-04 21:12 ` James Clark
2003-09-04 21:40 ` Alan Cox
2003-09-04 21:41 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2003-09-04 22:19 ` Jamie Lokier
2003-09-04 21:29 ` Richard B. Johnson
2003-09-04 21:51 ` James Clark
2003-09-04 22:06 ` Alan Cox
2003-09-04 22:10 ` Martin Mares
2003-09-04 22:23 ` Gustav Petersson
2003-09-05 17:52 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2003-09-05 18:31 ` James Clark
2003-09-05 18:59 ` Martin Schlemmer [this message]
2003-09-05 19:12 ` Dale P. Smith
2003-09-05 19:45 ` Stan Bubrouski
2003-09-05 19:59 ` Richard B. Johnson
2003-09-05 20:01 ` James Clark
2003-09-05 20:08 ` Mike Fedyk
2003-09-05 21:15 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2003-09-05 23:19 ` Bernd Eckenfels
2003-09-10 20:50 ` Timothy Miller
2003-09-10 20:48 ` Richard B. Johnson
2003-09-10 23:22 ` James Clark
2003-09-10 23:58 ` Greg KH
2003-09-12 20:51 ` Timothy Miller
2003-09-12 20:55 ` Tim Hockin
2003-09-15 11:39 ` Richard B. Johnson
2003-09-05 20:53 Chad Kitching
2003-09-05 23:30 ` Mike Fedyk
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-09-04 22:41 Chad Kitching
2003-09-03 17:53 James Clark
2003-09-03 17:49 ` Andre Hedrick
2003-09-03 18:23 ` Guillaume Morin
2003-09-04 4:10 ` Andre Hedrick
2003-09-03 18:35 ` Guillaume Morin
2003-09-03 19:30 ` Andre Hedrick
2003-09-03 18:18 ` Greg KH
2003-09-03 18:23 ` Richard B. Johnson
2003-09-03 18:49 ` Patrick Mochel
2003-09-03 18:58 ` Gábor Lénárt
2003-09-03 20:18 ` Christoph Hellwig
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1062788373.3371.32.camel@workshop.saharacpt.lan \
--to=azarah@gentoo.org \
--cc=Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu \
--cc=jimwclark@ntlworld.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).