MS attacking government use of "open source"
Angel R. Rivera
angel at wolf.com
Fri May 24 15:50:24 PDT 2002
Yeah, probably since that old Oracle 8i commercial saying M$ SQL was 3
times slower than Oracle 8i. They went to a lab that pronounced that M$
Windoze was much faster than Linux-something anyone who actually has any
experience in anything knows right away is false. Then you truth came out
how they had their hottest shots go there and tune up winbloze and de-tune
the Linux box. When you can not believe anything they say fron the start
who cares what the speed is.
They had this web site, something like unixsucks.com (not the real name)
but come to find out it was running on FreeBSD. When people got wind of it,
it went down for over a week.. *LOL* I
At 06:21 PM 5/24/2002 -0400, John Nelson wrote:
>They tried this with one of their database products... you are forbidden
>from making any performance tests public. Doesn't that tell you what kind
>of company you're dealing with when you buy Microsoft products? Sounds
>more like a closed, totalitarian, police state to me.
>Josip Loncaric wrote:
>>"Rivera, Angel R" wrote:
>>>SecurityFocus just had an article on why M$ should not open source their
>>Microsoft is secretive even about the performance of their software.
>>Their latest "critical update" for Windows augments the EULA so that the
>>users have to agree NOT to discuss their .NET benchmarking results with
>>third parties without a prior written Microsoft approval.
>>Isn't that special?
More information about the Beowulf