*BSD News Article 92056


Return to BSD News archive

Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.carno.net.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.mira.net.au!news.vbc.net!vbcnet-west!garlic.com!fox.almaden.ibm.com!uunet!in2.uu.net!206.229.87.25!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-ana-7.sprintlink.net!wellspring.us.dg.com!mojo.europe.dg.com!mellifluous.europe.dg.com!colin
From: colin@mellifluous.europe.dg.com (Colin Smith)
Newsgroups: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: Linux or FreeBSD (or something else?)
Date: 27 Mar 1997 10:15:46 GMT
Organization: Data General UK
Lines: 68
Message-ID: <5hdhci$7nc@mojo.europe.dg.com>
References: <332c9a76.3278270@news.adelaide.on.net> <01bc32f2$3783f300$04000001@Colin> <E79F14.n7z@forthdv.pfm-mainz.de> <332f5ffb.519605@news.sprynet.com> <5h51ma$b1u$2@kayrad.ziplink.net> <3337e3ad.1847437@news.sprynet.com> <5hbh2g$gah$1@kayrad.ziplink.net> <333990e3.2587820@news.sprynet.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mellifluous.europe.dg.com
Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au alt.os.linux:19457 comp.os.linux.misc:166578 comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc:37821

In article <333990e3.2587820@news.sprynet.com>, lcappite@sprynet.com (Goatboy) writes:
|> >=Many servers (large ones too) don't support compressing on the fly.
|> >=And I'm not sure if war ftp 1.55 can tar on the fly.
|> >
|> >So the answer is NO, I guess... Poor choice of ftp-server, then, IMHO...
|> 
|> Actually no. It is almost the *only* server used for warez.
|> 
|> >Another common misconception :) Your computer did not get any slower
|> >since the time you bought it... Unlike cars, computers don't get
|> >worse with time (well, they may break)... You may "feel" it is slower,
|> >because you've already experienced a faster one.
|> 
|> Sort of. My computer has become slower because software has become
|> less efficient and bigger therefore much more taxing on my system.
|> 
|> >	Those willing to give up functionality for ease of use
|> >	loose both and deserve neither.
|> 
|> What *significant* things can UNIX do that NT4 or 95 can't?

Serve 80 million hits per day? Directly address 32Gb of RAM? :)
Scale man..... Scale.

Install Linux on every computer in your company and not pay a 
penny (cent) in license fees?

I'd say that these are fairly significant.


Plus Linux can run on a 386 with 4Mb of Ram.
(great for a firewall) or a workgroup webserver.

Linux is faster too. Check out this months Web Developer magazine - 
The Platform Wars.

Red Hat Linux blows NT away. Same hardware, Same Webserver.
		NT 4.0
Clients		Connects/s	Throughput Mb/s
8		18.69		1.01
16		31.92		1.88
32		29.97		1.68
48		29.23		1.65
64		22.53		1.12

		Red Hat 4.0
Clients		Connects/s	Throughput Mb/s
8		18.01		1.32
16		31.93		1.99
32		31.58		1.93
48		31.27		1.83
64		29.82		1.41

NT tops out a whole 16 clients & then starts losing it.
While Linux is still going strong at 64 clients.
(I can just see an Energizer bunny going past with Linux 
tatooed all over it) :-)

The _ONLY_ time that NT does better is with the _LOWEST_ number
of clients (8) _and_ then _only_ on the connections per second.

Oh Yeah. I forgot to mention. Red hat Linux is free to download
or you could buy the CD for $3 from www.cheapbytes.com. 

-- 
Archeus Free FRPG - http://www.geocities.com/Area51/3002/
Colin Smith (colin@mellifluous.europe.dg.com)
My opinions are completely my own, bought and paid for.