Date: Sun, 8 Jul 2001 20:28:04 -0500 From: Derek Moeller <moeller@dophnic.yi.org> To: chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: OS portability (was: Things you learn in school) Message-ID: <20010708202804.A835@dophnic.yi.org> In-Reply-To: <20010709080330.G80862@wantadilla.lemis.com>; from grog@FreeBSD.org on Mon, Jul 09, 2001 at 08:03:30AM %2B0930 References: <3B478570.67B193CB@pitt.edu> <p05100302b76e6fce91c0@[194.78.241.123]> <20010709080330.G80862@wantadilla.lemis.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Jul 09, 2001 at 08:03:30AM +0930, Greg Lehey wrote: > On Sunday, 8 July 2001 at 22:16:37 +0200, Brad Knowles wrote: > > At 5:56 PM -0400 7/7/01, Pedro F. Giffuni wrote: > > > >> * Linux is the choice for implementing webservices because it runs on > >> any type of hardware. > > > > Yeah, right. How many different types of hardware does Linux > > run on? And how many different types of hardware does NetBSD run > > on? Anyone who makes a claim like this for Linux obviously hasn't > > done their homework, and shouldn't be teaching people who might not > > be expected to know these kinds of things.... > > OK, let's take a look. RS/6000? Linux does, NetBSD doesn't really. > Ultra SPARC with PCI bus? Linux does. Last time I looked, NetBSD > didn't. S/390? Linux does, NetBSD doesn't. SMP machines? Linux > does, NetBSD doesn't. > > Especially from an IBM point of view, this points very much to Linux > as being the more portable system. I don't think anybody cares very > much whether Linux runs on a Sun 3. As far as I can tell, portability doesn't have very much commercial attraction. The original professor stated that the reason why Linux is the choice for implementing web services is the fact that it runs on any type of hardware. That's obviously wrong, but the reason[1] it's wrong is because portability is largely irrelevant in that context, not because some other platform is more or less portable than Linux. While FreeBSD has comparatively little platform portability, it's still quite effective as far as network and disk performance go (areas which significantly affect web service viability). Besides, if one observes the choice for implementing web services based on popularity, the prize goes to one of the least portable platforms in the group, made by some Redmond company. Since it is not specified otherwise, the term 'The choice' should be simplified to the number of people or organizations choosing that software. The web service platform of choice doesn't have a whole lot to do with technical traits; it has a whole lot to do with product promotion fed by large bank rolls (a symbiotic relationship). [1] This is observing the most prominent error in the statement, ignoring incorrect phrases such as "any type of hardware." -- Derek Moeller To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010708202804.A835>