__/ [ Tim Smith ] on Thursday 18 May 2006 08:31 \__
> In article <1536843.OVe5KVMXfc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>> As it later turns out, Tim calls this benchmark "worthless" -- the same
>> benchmark he point out for vanity purposes. Weak effort if you ask me...
> So let me see if I understand this. *You* start a thread titled "Linux
> Mac OS X to Shame", citing this benchmark. *You* are the first person in
> this group to mention that benchmark.
Yes, but I didn't truly believe its figures and conclusions to be unanimous.
Benchmarks can easily be slanted, especially when an hypothesis exists. Was
it "vanity"? Yes, probably/ Is Get the Facts Campaign vanity? No, it's a lie
which was attained by using bad experimentation to begin with. It was funded
to reach at a certain conslusion artificially, generating organic figures.
> Nearly two weeks later, after people have had a chance to analyze what is
> going on, I post a link to an article showing what was wrong with that
> benchmark. How is that "vanity purposes"?
Right. I'd rephrase if I could. *smile*
> Also, the way you've phrased this, you seem to be saying that I've done
> kind of about face between my two posts in this thread. How the heck did
> you come to that conclusion?
My bad. The phrasing was poor.
Roy S. Schestowitz
http://Schestowitz.com | SuSE GNU/Linux ¦ PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
8:45am up 20 days 15:42, 9 users, load average: 0.29, 0.57, 0.66
http://iuron.com - help build a non-profit search engine