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

Valdis.Kletnieks
2003-09-05T21:16:03Z

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1520 bytes --]

On Fri, 05 Sep 2003 19:31:09 BST, James Clark said:

> > 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.

What you 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!

Oh.. so now you're complaining that I pointed out that even a system that's
down 40% of the time meets *YOUR* criteria if enough more people run it?

In fact, if the number of Windows users is 100 times the number of Linux users,
and Linux is 98% reliable, then Windows only needs to make about 2% reliable
to win by your criteria. OK, you want to complain about the 100? Make it
500M windows and 50M linux, and Linux 98% reliable, then Windows only
needs to make 10% uptime to win by your criteria.

My point is that your criteria of "total aggregate uptime" doesn't prove anything
between diddly and squat about the actual reliability of the system.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 226 bytes --]