Garrett Cooper yanegomi at
Sun Aug 28 19:15:06 UTC 2011

On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 12:07 PM, Garrett Cooper <yanegomi at> wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 11:47 AM, Matthias Apitz <guru at> wrote:
>> El día Sunday, August 28, 2011 a las 07:27:49PM +0100, Chris Rees escribió:
>>> On 27 August 2011 20:32, Garrett Cooper <yanegomi at> wrote:
>>> > On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 12:13 PM, Hartmann, O.
>>> > <ohartman at> wrote:
>>> >> This website should be brushed up or taken offline!
>>> >> It seems full of vintage stuff from glory days.
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> > Agreed. Things have changed quite a bit in the last decade.
>>> It reads rather FUD-like too.
>> It's a pitty that the comments until now are only general like "full of
>> vintage stuff", "agreed", "rather FUD", but without concrete critics or
>> proposals of changes of wrong data.
> Ok then:
> 1. It's out of date (the obvious). This comes down to some of the
> information being completely incorrect as far as featuresets, and just
> looks embarrassing in other respects because it's using Windows 2000
> as a comparison (it's a 10 year old OS).
> 2. Broken links.
> 3. The smiley icons are very unprofessional.
> 4. There's a lot of wasted horizontal space on the webpage.
> 5. There's no data to back up some of the claimed observations (what
> version of FreeBSD, Linux, Windows were used; what performance metrics
> were obtained; how things were tuned; etc).
> 6. Some of the data (example: the SQL error text under "Performance"
> in the Windows column) is in the wrong spot, s.t. it distracts
> readers. If anything it belongs in the footnotes.
> 7. The breakdown is too terse. Execs and business types like looking
> at bullet points; the technical folks like looking at things in more
> gross detail.

One more:

8. Text like "The Linux community intentionally makes it difficult for
hardware manufacturers to release binary-only drivers." is
confrontational and unprofessional. It's the GPL license more than the
community that forces vendors to opensource proprietary code because
that's the primary goal of the license -- to keep the source free and
open -- whereas BSD allows the developer to do whatever they want with
the source.


More information about the freebsd-current mailing list