Message-Id: <200309052115.h85LFtXh004015@turing-police.cc.vt.edu>
To: jimwclark@ntlworld.com
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Driver Model 2 Proposal - Linux Kernel Performance v Usability 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 05 Sep 2003 19:31:09 BST."
             <200309051931.09491.jimwclark@ntlworld.com> 
From: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu
References: <1062637356.846.3471.camel@cube> <200309042251.38514.jimwclark@ntlworld.com> <200309051752.h85HqYS0031240@turing-police.cc.vt.edu>
            <200309051931.09491.jimwclark@ntlworld.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="==_Exmh_-1985860134P";
	 micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 17:15:55 -0400
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 2148
Lines: 53

--==_Exmh_-1985860134P
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

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.


--==_Exmh_-1985860134P
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001

iD8DBQE/WP0KcC3lWbTT17ARAq45AJ9OAOTOHnKjB9qbxIDGZNY9jMgUvACg3DxI
hfjadZWVfqh1ltQF4v0OLPc=
=ASrY
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--==_Exmh_-1985860134P--
-
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/