Are hardware vendors starting to bail on FreeBSD ... ?

[jan gestre]

On 7/25/06, Greg Barniskis <nalists at scls.lib.wi.us> wrote:
>
> Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Danial Thom" <danial_thom at yahoo.com>
> > To: "Greg Barniskis" <nalists at scls.lib.wi.us>; "Nick Withers"
> > <nick at nickwithers.com>
> > Cc: <jerrymc at clunix.cl.msu.edu>; <danial_thom at yahoo.com>;
> > <freebsd-questions at freebsd.org>
> > Sent: Thursday, July 13, 2006 11:10 AM
> > Subject: Re: Are hardware vendors starting to bail on FreeBSD ... ?
> >
> >
> >> Burying your head in the sand is a common method
> >> used by stupid people that have no answer to the
> >> truth. I don't blame you; you guys don't want
> >> your employers to know that you've wasted man
> >> 1000s of their dollars because you don't know the
> >> performance characteristics of the hardware
> >> you've recommended. It must be thoroughly
> >> embarrassing.
> [snip]
>
> > I do agree with Danial that most USERS on this list are
> > burying their heads in the sand on this issue.  But I will
> > point out that there isn't really any reason they shouldn't
> > be.  What the market wants is features, not speed.  And
> > that is what the FreeBSD developers are working on.
>
> Features over speed is generally the right equation, yes.
>
> But I think you're being too generous to Danial. The quote of his
> above was in direct response to my assertion that many people refuse
> to listen to him because he frequently engages in cheap demagogy[1].
>
> His response? Another whole boatload of cheap demagogy, questioning
> the intelligence, aptitude and moral character of anyone who doesn't
> listen to him, by way of accusations that are wholly unsupported by
> facts. I could probably rest my case right there, but I think his
> perception (and yours) that people are not receptive to claims of
> FreeBSD performance problems is quite simply false.
>
> Every time a performance question is brought up, I see a flurry of
> calls for clarification and for the formulation of repeatable tests
> which are generally agreed to be an accurate gauge of the problem.
> People with performance problems then /sometimes/ get upset (I think
> because the questioning and testing tends to assume they're wrong
> and they get defensive about it).
>
> The problem is, scientific testing of an assertion must try to prove
> the hypothesis is false, and must posit (and also try to disprove)
> any plausible alternative explanations. There's just no reason to
> get upset about that. Raising questions about a claim, and trying to
> explain an outcome's root cause by alternative hypotheses, is in
> fact the /required behavior/ of critical thinkers.
>
> When the OP of a performance problem does follow through with
> testing, and is willing to engage civilly in a logical debate, then
> generally there is a successful outcome to the thread. When the OP
> of a problem gets emotional about it and starts spouting cheap
> demagogy, then other users and developers quickly will walk away
> from the table.
>
> Walking away from trollery is in no way equivalent to these users
> and developers sticking their heads in the sand on the issue. It's
> the predictable response of critical thinkers who recognize demagogy
> as a tool of /antitruth/. Those who consistently use demagogy are
> always more interested in winning an argument than in finding the
> truth, and any critical thinker either sees right through the murk
> of BS being tossed at them or least has enough intuitive sense to
> recoil from it.
>
> And that is /the only reason/ why people ignore Danial. His brand of
> cheap demagogy is so potent that the smell of /antitruth/ emanates
> from his posts in a field so strong that it might as well be a
> physically repelling force. He might do better in politics or
> religion where these trollish "debating" tactics are the norm. But
> in a community of critical thinkers, the "truthiness" of demagogy
> will rarely find any traction at all.
>
>
> i thought the consensus was stop feeding the troll? so why is thread still
> alive :D
>