From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262514AbTIEVQD (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Sep 2003 17:16:03 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262661AbTIEVQC (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Sep 2003 17:16:02 -0400 Received: from turing-police.cc.vt.edu ([128.173.14.107]:30080 "EHLO turing-police.cc.vt.edu") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262514AbTIEVP6 (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Sep 2003 17:15:58 -0400 Message-Id: <200309052115.h85LFtXh004015@turing-police.cc.vt.edu> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.6.3 04/04/2003 with nmh-1.0.4+dev To: jimwclark@ntlworld.com Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Driver Model 2 Proposal - Linux Kernel Performance v Usability In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 05 Sep 2003 19:31:09 BST." <200309051931.09491.jimwclark@ntlworld.com> From: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu References: <1062637356.846.3471.camel@cube> <200309042251.38514.jimwclark@ntlworld.com> <200309051752.h85HqYS0031240@turing-police.cc.vt.edu> <200309051931.09491.jimwclark@ntlworld.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="==_Exmh_-1985860134P"; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 17:15:55 -0400 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --==_Exmh_-1985860134P Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On Fri, 05 Sep 2003 19:31:09 BST, James Clark said: > > 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. What you 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! Oh.. so now you're complaining that I pointed out that even a system that's down 40% of the time meets *YOUR* criteria if enough more people run it? In fact, if the number of Windows users is 100 times the number of Linux users, and Linux is 98% reliable, then Windows only needs to make about 2% reliable to win by your criteria. OK, you want to complain about the 100? Make it 500M windows and 50M linux, and Linux 98% reliable, then Windows only needs to make 10% uptime to win by your criteria. My point is that your criteria of "total aggregate uptime" doesn't prove anything between diddly and squat about the actual reliability of the system. --==_Exmh_-1985860134P Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001 iD8DBQE/WP0KcC3lWbTT17ARAq45AJ9OAOTOHnKjB9qbxIDGZNY9jMgUvACg3DxI hfjadZWVfqh1ltQF4v0OLPc= =ASrY -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --==_Exmh_-1985860134P--