-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
____/ Chris Ahlstrom on Tuesday 15 Nov 2011 12:00 : \____
> Roy Schestowitz wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> Where Linux crushes Windows like a bug: Supercomputers
>>
>> ,----[ Quote ]
>>| The faster a computer goes, the more likely is to have Linux at its heart.
>>| The most recent Top500 list of supercomputers shows that, if anything, Linux
>>| is becoming even more popular at computingâs high end.
>>|
>>| In the latest Top500 Supercomputer list, youâll find when you dig into the
>>| supercomputer statistics that Linux runs 457 of the worldâs fastest
>>| computers. Thatâs 91.4%. Linux is followed by Unix, with 30 or 6%; mixed
>>| operating systems with 11 supercomputers, 2.2%. In the back of the line,
>>| youâll find OpenSolaris and BSD with 1 computer andâoh me, oh myâWindows
>>| also with just 1 supercomputer to its credit. Thatâs a drop from 4 in the
>>| last supercomputer round up in June.
>> `----
>>
>> http://www.zdnet.com/blog/open-source/where-linux-crushes-windows-like-a-bug-supercomputers/9890
>
> A drop in supercomputing based on Windows? That's no surprise to me.
> I'm frankly surprised that people put up with the dog-slowness of
> Windows in large computing networks. Or even in small ones.
>
> Note that I'm basing that solely on what I've seen, and what I've seen
> may have been caused partly by the incompetence of the admins.
>
> Of course, the asstroturfers weigh in at that link:
>
> One Windows cluster can 'crush' 440+ other supercomputers running
> Linux, was all I got from this :-)
>
> After his previous article was reasonable towards both Windows and
> Linux, he just couldn't help but stroke his Linux-e-peen once again
> :P
>
> And of course Linux is a success in some areas. But the big desktop
> revolution he and the FSF loons predicted never came true.
>
> They had no need, as they designed Windows with the goal of running
> applications and software for the consumer and business world, in
> which Windows server outsells competing products to a margin of 75%
> for Window, with everyone else carving up the remaining 25%.
> On desktops they have close to 90%, with teh remaining 10% fought
> over by competing products.
>
> Linux is cheap compared to Windows that's it. About 3 years ago one
> SC in the top ten had the ability to boot either Windows or Linux.
> Windows actually showed slightly higher efficiency or the ratio
> between the peak and theoretical performance. They were also praising
> how easy it was to get Windows setup. The problem is that unless MS
> subsidizes the installation, it is simply too expensive to use
> Windows.
I have seen them subsidise it. It's so crappy that the experiments fall over and
it's soon back to Linux. People need to get work done, not bribes collected.
- --
~~ Best of wishes
Dr. Roy S. Schestowitz, Research Fellow
http://Schestowitz.com | GNU/Linux administration | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
Editor @ http://techrights.org & Broadcaster @ http://bytesmedia.co.uk/
Managing partner @ http://scifitness.co.uk & http://iuron.com
GPL-licensed 3-D Othello @ http://othellomaster.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
iEYEARECAAYFAk7DDDcACgkQU4xAY3RXLo5/DACffxOC/nqigNb3A+5sYbwOYcsk
cDgAoIpTvLBQw87s26hZ0oTZATPFRqgg
=aUwX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
|
|
