Performance 4.x vs. 6.x

[Kris Kennaway]

On Fri, Oct 13, 2006 at 01:34:36PM -0700, Danial Thom wrote:
> Yeah, bury your head in the sand as always.  
> 
> Its been proven over and over. Robert Watson has
> admitted many times that 6.x is not as fast as
> 4.x uniprocessor

FOR CERTAIN TASKS.  Your (misquoted) claim is demonstrably false in
generality, which is what makes 6.x so useful to many people.

If you can one day get this through your head and stop posting false
claims, people may eventually stop calling you a troll.  I hope so,
because you might actually have something to contribute if only you
can learn to properly qualify your statements.

Kris
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-performance/attachments/20061013/23d3b3ad/attachment.pgp