Re: Driver Model 2 Proposal - Linux Kernel Performance v Usability

[Dale P. Smith]

James Clark wrote:
> Valdis Kletnieks wrote:
>
>
> > So if 500 million people are productive 60% of the time and hosed 40% of
> > the time, and 5 million people are productive 95% of the time, the 60/40
> > model is better because 60% of 500M is more than 95% of 5M?
>
>
> This is a good example of the kind of rubbish that is sometimes talked around 
> here. I've lost count of the number of times I've heard the 'Windows is SO 
> unstable argument' it almost seems like a religion. I would agree with what 
> you have said if Windows was actually unusable 40% of the time. Do you really 
> believe this figure? In reality it is much better than that as plainly the 
> majority of the WORLD are using it. I love Linux but I also use Windows. 
> Sorry to break your delusion, it ain't that bad.

The only windows system that I have seen that was reliable (unless the 
people there were lying to me) was a big ibm netfinity system.  I 
believe it was stable because it didn't use any extra harware or drivers 
except what ibm had installed on the box.

What I'm saying is that most of the problems with windows are from 
flakey, half-baked drivers and dll's form third parties.  I've got no 
hard numbers, just my personal experiences.

Binary onlyt drivers are bad.  Source drivers are good.  THat's just the 
way it is.

-Dale

--
Dale P. Smith
dsmith at actron dot com

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/