Re: Driver Model 2 Proposal - Linux Kernel Performance v Usability

Martin Schlemmer
2003-09-05T19:09:24Z

On Fri, 2003-09-05 at 20:31, James Clark wrote:
> Valdis Kletnieks wrote:
>
> > 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. Do you really
> believe this figure? In reality it is much better than that as plainly the
> majority of the WORLD are using it. I love Linux but I also use Windows.
> Sorry to break your delusion, it ain't that bad.
>
> > Ask Joe User how he feels about NOT being able to add IPv6 support to
> > his existing system until his vendor says they'll do it for him, and then
> > look at when Linux had support.
>
> Its very true that in the Windows world you have to wait for Micro$oft
> sometimes, it is even true that they probably hold back features so that can
> put them in the next release and get you to pay for them. Why is this any
> worse than expecting Joe User, who is a 'user' and not a 'developer' to
> rebuild the most important bits of his OS and risk breaking the whole lot.
>
> This is not about Windows v Linux so please stop compraring what I have
> proposed to Windows. This debate should be about Performance v Usability.
> Source interfaces have ultimate performance, nobody has suggested, yet, that
> they are easier for Joe User than a binary interface.
>

Right. Not trying to get involved in this mess [8)], but there
was a few other comments that was less linux/windows, but more
valid ... what about responding to them? Could be interesting
to hear what you have to say ...

> James
>
>
>
> On Friday 05 Sep 2003 6:52 pm, you wrote:
> > On Thu, 04 Sep 2003 22:51:38 BST, James Clark 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!
> >
> > 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?
> >
> > What's wrong with this picture?
> >
> > > hence the OS could escape the niche box it currently is in. Please ask
> > > Joe User how he feels about rebuilding his whole OS to add IP6 support to
> > > an existing stable system etc.
> >
> > Ask Joe User how he feels about NOT being able to add IPv6 support to
> > his existing system until his vendor says they'll do it for him, and then
> > look at when Linux had support.
> >
> > http://www.ipv6.org/impl/linux.html
> > http://www.ipv6.org/impl/windows.html
> >
> > And most important, google around for +ipv6 +"craig metz", and look at when
> > *he* did the IPv6 work - and you were free to put the patches on your
> > system as soon as he posted them.
> >
> > Now as you were saying?
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
--
Martin Schlemmer