Date: Tue, 25 Mar 1997 18:44:50 +0000 (GMT) From: Stephen Roome <steve@visint.co.uk> To: "Ron G. Minnich" <rminnich@Sarnoff.COM> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: more Mac vs BSD (fwd) Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.91.970325184104.24732G-100000@bagpuss.visint.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.91.970325091228.29712A-100000@terra>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
You think this is bad, I was looking at some websites yesterday and found a 'powered by a Mac' link, needless to say I followed it (whilst laughing) to this: http://prod01.apple.com/productinfo/datasheets/ss/aiss.html which really has to be seen to be beleived, particularly the quote near the top about Affordability. (... lowest-cost WWW server available today ... etc.. ) I took up the offer of contacting the webmaster, but haven't got a reply yet. On Tue, 25 Mar 1997, Ron G. Minnich wrote: > now what planet were these tests performed on? > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > Date: Tue, 25 Mar 1997 12:10:16 GMT > To: rminnich@sarnoff.com > Subject: more Mac vs BSD > > * In Apple's testing on a 10 Mbps Ethernet network, Open Transport > could sustain throughput of 9.6 Mbps. In contrast BSD could only > sustain 7 Mbps (and the venerable MacTCP could only do 2.3 Mbps). > That may not sound like a huge difference, but what about a 100 > Mbps Ethernet network? Open Transport has been shown to sustain 40 > Mbps on those networks - how well will BSD do? > > Steve Roome.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.91.970325184104.24732G-100000>