The mainstream media reads Linux Today, and I want to make sure
that this message is heard loud and clear:
In regard to the recent Mindcraft
survey that showed that Windows NT outperforms Linux, the
careful journalist will understand that Microsoft provided the
funding for this “analysis”. Take a look at this piece of
information, hidden in the middle of the white paper:
“Mindcraft, Inc. conducted the performance tests described in
this report between March 10 and March 13, 1999. Microsoft
Corporation sponsored the testing reported herein.”
As you are writing your story for tomorrow’s edition, please
realize that you have a responsibility to report the facts. The
fact here is that Microsoft has paid an organization to create an
analysis of their product against their competitor’s product.
Your readers deserve to understand that this was not an
independant and un-biased report.
To help you round out your story, here are some links to other
published analyses:
- Smart Reseller Online
(Ziff-Davis): The Best Windows File Server: Linux! - Sun Microsystems publishes Samba
benchmarks - Smart Reseller Online
(Ziff-Davis): The New King Of The Hill - Netcraft: Apache Increases Lead
over Microsoft IIS - Computer Reseller News
(Ziff-Davis): Samba 2.0: A License To Kill NT? - PC Week (Ziff-Davis): Samba
up-tempo performer - ZDNet: SAMBA & Linux: Beating
Microsoft at its own Game - Microsoft Internal Memo: OSS is
long-term credible … FUD tactics can not be used to combat
it
Jeremy Allison, a member of the Samba project, has discovered
that their claims of having searched for support in the newsgroups
appear to be false, as a usenet search turned nothing up.
Additionally, the original author of Samba, Andrew Tridgell, has
stated that they set a parameter that caused Samba to have degraded
performance.
See Jeremy’s
posting for more information on this.
There may be additional information over at Linux Weekly
News
–dw