[kwlug disc.] Apache vs IIS system call chart

[Chris Bruner]

Oh it's not hard to believe that IIS/Windows is more poorly coded.  I 
just try to remain objective, because I know I have a prejudice against 
windows.  It's too easy to be a cheer leader, and I would much rather be 
a cheer leader with provable facts then a suspicious picture. 

We don't know how complex the page was that was loaded, it might have 
been a corner case for Windows. It might have been "out of all these web 
pages, this one goes hog wild on windows, let's use that one."  We don't 
know what all those calls are, they could be stubs for all we know.  We 
don't even know if those pictures were made from tracing live code or 
running a program to examine the source code.

It's a good story, worthy of MS itself. But if the pictures were 
reversed wouldn't you be calling FUD?

John Van Ostrand wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-02-06 at 19:41 -0500, Chris Bruner wrote:
>   
>> I wouldn't mind knowing how those graphs were made.  Can a non-FUD
>> version be done.
>>     
>
> I've scanned through the FUD threads on slashdot and don't see anything
> that rings true with me. The comments on this are what seem to be FUD.
>
> Is it really so hard to believe that IIS/Windows are more poorly coded
> than Apache/Linux?
>
> I do agree that it would be nice to see the labels clearly.
>
> --
> John Van Ostrand
>          Net Direct Inc.
>  
> CTO, co-CEO
> 564 Weber St. N. Unit 12
>    Waterloo, ON N2L 5C6 
>  map 
> john at netdirect.ca
>         Ph: 519-883-1172
>  ext.5102
> Linux Solutions / IBM
> Hardware
>         Fx: 519-883-8533
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> KWLUG-Disc mailing list
> KWLUG-Disc at kwlug.org
> http://listserv.kwlug.org/mailman/listinfo/kwlug-disc
>
>   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://listserv.ccjclearline.com/pipermail/kwlug-disc/attachments/20070206/4dadd856/attachment.htm