Samba faster than Windows 2000 on identical hardware.

[Sean Elble]

The most interesting part of that test (in the magazine anyway . . .
cancelled my subsciption :-)) is that they _insisted_ on turning oplocks off
on Samba for one test, and leaving them on Windows 2000, just to see if they
could get their "favorite product" to win the competition . . . uh, no. :-)
In all honesty, that magazine has to be the most biased magazine towards
Windows that I have ever read in my life . . . when a product like Samba
wins against Windows 2000 in PC Magazine, I'm pretty damn impressed. Great
job Samba team!

-----------------------------------------------
Sean P. Elble
Editor, Writer, Co-Webmaster
ReactiveLinux.com (Formerly MaximumLinux.org)
http://www.reactivelinux.com/
elbles at reactivelinux.com
-----------------------------------------------

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeremy Allison" <jra at samba.org>
To: <samba at samba.org>
Cc: <samba-technical at samba.org>; <jra at samba.org>
Sent: Monday, November 05, 2001 10:29 AM
Subject: Samba faster than Windows 2000 on identical hardware.


> This page (of a much longer story) might be interesting :
>
> http://www.pcmag.com/article/0,2997,s%253D1474%2526a%253D16554,00.asp
>
> Netbench results show Samba 2.2 faster than Windows 2000 in
> all cases on the same hardware (up to 1GHz processor with 512Mb ram).
>
> Regards,
>
> Jeremy Allison,
> Samba Team.
>
> PS. Yes I know, lies, damn lies & benchmarks etc.... :-).
> PPS. I wonder if any of the Samba vendors might like to
> reproduce these results :-) :-).
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
> instructions:  http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba