| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
Microsoft says it's faster than Linux on file serving | |
|
||
| Time: 12:40 EST/17:40 GMT | News Source: IDG | Posted By: Robert Stein | ||
|
Microsoft continued turning up the heat on Linux with its Get The Facts campaign last week. This time, Microsoft claimed that Windows 2003 was faster at file and print serving tasks than a Red Hat Linux server, based on a test performed by Veritest. The tests pitted a Windows 2003 Standard Edition server against Red Hat Linux Enterprise Linux ES 3.0 running Samba 3.0 - a software package that allows Linux/Unix servers to host Windows clients. The machines were loaded onto an HP DL380 G3 with two 2.8 GHz Pentium 4 processors, 4GB of RAM and an Intel PRO/1000 MT Dual Port Gigabit Server Adapter. Also used was a Dell PowerEdge 500SC server configured with one 1 GHz Pentium III processor, 1GB of RAM, an onboard Intel 100M bit/sec Ethernet network adapter, and one Intel PRO/100 Fast Ethernet NIC. Microsoft said the results showed that the Windows server performed 46 per cent better than the HP-based Linux box, and 24 per cent better than the Dell Linux server. | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 26 through 50 of 235 Prev | Last | Next |
The time now is
11:43:31 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #26 By 1643 (64.73.227.129) at 6/24/2004 1:01:58 PM |
|
"I provided a link to a story with a quote from Intel saying Linux was first on Itanium 64 bit above. I guess thats mindless. As for NT supporting. "
Didn't AMD release their chip before Intel? I could be wrong here... "Hmm fair enough. Can you point me to some place where i can buy a license to this? Because according to Microsoft the only way to get it is by buying an Itanium system. " It's included with your new purchase from OEM's. If you want to put it on a self built box, you have to wait until more HW is released or get on the beta. "Linux was first on Itanium 64bit according to Intel who is the Authoritative source on this. Linux was first on AMD 64bit as the Windows version for this is still in beta Windows NT was first on Alpha processors. " Beta, No beta, it was still available for production environments. But it doesn't matter, it can be fought both ways depending on your perception. PS - I don't hate linux. |
| #27 By 7797 (63.76.44.200) at 6/24/2004 1:08:54 PM |
|
"Beta, No beta, it was still available for production environments. But it doesn't matter, it can be fought both ways depending on your perception."
Only if one's perception is that running a beta OS is good enough to run in a production environment. PS I don't hate microsoft This post was edited by tgnb on Thursday, June 24, 2004 at 13:10. |
| #28 By 19992 (164.214.4.61) at 6/24/2004 1:47:16 PM |
|
#12 said "They didn't lye, that was the latest stable/popular kernel that was deployed at the beginning of the study. Especially since Windows 2003 was released in 2003, so maybe we should use the stable kernel that was deployed at that time to be fair. Is it 2.4"
True, but they did update the SMB protocol to a version dated April 15th 2004. Several performance tweaks were also introduced to the Windows servers. I notice that none of the performance tweaks (although mentioned) for Linux are never listed with anywhere near the amount of detail that those for MS are. I wonder why that is? Fact is, none of these tests should be used as the basis for a business decision. As #4 said "YOu do the test yourself and find out the truth on your hardware". |
| #29 By 7797 (63.76.44.200) at 6/24/2004 4:50:34 PM |
|
"Most folks using linux now used to use proprietary UNIX."
Spoken like someone who has NO CLUE! |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 26 through 50 of 235 Prev | Last | Next |
The time now is
11:43:31 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
