From: James Clark <jimwclark@ntlworld.com>
Reply-To: jimwclark@ntlworld.com
To: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu
Subject: Re: Driver Model 2 Proposal - Linux Kernel Performance v Usability
Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2003 19:31:09 +0100
User-Agent: KMail/1.5
References: <1062637356.846.3471.camel@cube> <200309042251.38514.jimwclark@ntlworld.com> <200309051752.h85HqYS0031240@turing-police.cc.vt.edu>
In-Reply-To: <200309051752.h85HqYS0031240@turing-police.cc.vt.edu>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200309051931.09491.jimwclark@ntlworld.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 3125
Lines: 68

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.

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/