yanegomi at gmail.com
Sun Aug 28 19:07:43 UTC 2011
On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 11:47 AM, Matthias Apitz <guru at unixarea.de> 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 gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 12:13 PM, Hartmann, O.
>> > <ohartman at zedat.fu-berlin.de> wrote:
>> >> This website should be brushed up or taken offline!
>> >> It seems full of vintage stuff from glory days.
>> >> http://www.freebsd.org/marketing/os-comparison.html
>> > 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.
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 It's out of date (the obvious).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
More information about the freebsd-performance