Re: More benchmark bullshit, and Linux luser mating calls... (was Re: Linux betas NT in TPC testing, running Oracle8

Walter Tice USG <tice_at_hunch.zk3.dec.com> wrote:

: In article <7g5aa4$8o$1_at_nnrp03.primenet.com> Stephen Edwards <ja207030_at_primenet.com> writes:

: >Leslie Mikesell <les_at_MCS.COM> wrote:

: >: Downtime is downtime. Stability means running. I take it you haven't

: >No. Stability means that the operating system doesn't crash. Just
: >because I reboot an OS, doesn't make it unstable. If I have to boot SCO
: >UNIX 3 or four times in one month, that means "it has to be rebooted to
: >relink the kernel because I added stuff to it, etc.", not "it's unstable."
: >What you're saying does not make any sense.

: Of course, power failures, maint, and new feature adds that require
: reboot do not count.  There isn't an NT server running anywhere in the
: world that can touch UNIX or some of the mainframes for uptime. Compaq

For "uptime", I agree. WindowsNT does require a little too much rebooting. As for "stability"... well, I would argue that point. :)

[] "No footnote for you!" -- Footnote Nazi

--
.-----.
|[_] :| Stephen S. Edwards II | http://www.primenet.com/~rakmount
| =  :| "But something's wrong.  It takes me a moment to pin it down;
|     |  the monitor's different.  Instead of the nice 17' Trinitron,
|_..._|  there's a 15' raster gun in a dirty plastic case." -- Ben in ASR