httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Jason A. Dour" <...@bcc.louisville.edu>
Subject Re: PCWeek article...
Date Wed, 11 Jun 1997 12:31:32 GMT
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

I'm responding to a gazillion of PCWeek posts...

On Tue, 10 Jun 1997, Marc Slemko wrote:
> I can't speak for this particular article, but the typical comparison is
> done by someone without a clue about Unix or configuring anything.

	That's apparent...but it does bother me that IIS "out of box" is
supposedly *three times* faster than Apache "out of box."  Is there
nothing we can do about this, even documentation-wise?

> BTW, did you know that, according to
> http://www8.zdnet.com/pcweek/news/0609/09apache.html :
> 
> 	Anyone unfamiliar with hard-core Unix programming will not be
> 	able to get Apache running, said users. 

	PAH!  I'm by far not a "hard-core" Unix programmer...but I do well
with Apache.  8)  Of course, I'm just Hard Core(tm)(or "Punk As Fuck" or
"Punk Rock" or...), though, so maybe that's why Apache is easy for me. ;P


On Tue, 10 Jun 1997, Chuck Murcko wrote:
> I think those were old numbers using 1.1.x on an untuned solaris x86
> system. We may well see some new 1.2.0 numbers soon, from a Linux system
> running a P6 with some reasonable tuning.

	According to the graph, they tested IIS 3.0 for NT 4.0, Apache
1.1.1 on RedHat Linux 4.1, and Apache 1.2b11 on RedHat Linux 4.1.  Order
of performance?  IIS.  1.1.1.  1.2b11.  The graph is on page 18 of the
June 9th, 1997 PC Week...the one with the AG geeks on the cover. 


On Tue, 10 Jun 1997, Brian Behlendorf wrote:
> I'm rather unhappy that despite my best efforts to represent otherwise,
> the server is still seen as for Unix gurus only.  And the chart showing
> speed lagging behind IIS is an embarrassment.

	Well, technically, the article touting Apache as "for UNIX nerds
only" was a *different* article from the one featuring AG members.  This
article of "It's Not Easy.  So What?" was a "PC Week Labs benchmark."
Obviously, they don't know their benches from their arses.

> If someone wants to write a rebuttal, I am almost positive we could
> get it printed.  

	I'd be happy to give it a try.  I'm in an expository mode at the
moment with several other projects.  I could fit a rebuttal in.  Should I
word it from the AG as a whole, or make it more personal?  Which would
everyone rather see?  I give "from the AG" a BIG +1.


On Tue, 10 Jun 1997, sameer wrote:
> 	I told our marketing dept to write a rebuttal saying, "Apache
> kicks ass and is easy to use." I don't think we've gotten a chance to
> see the article yet though.

	Or should we let Sameer's folk write it?

ohhhh,PCWeek,you'regoingDOWN!
Jason
# Jason A. Dour <jad@bcc.louisville.edu>                            1101
# Programmer Analyst II; Department of Radiation Oncology; Univ. of Lou.
# Finger for URLs, PGP public key, geek code, PJ Harvey info, et cetera.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBM56ap5o1JaC71RLxAQHetQP/ZKkvtSqPAkWHKPpxEE/vkrD6Zvj/eFC8
LyLcbvBtUkAuOfdGgWejNxf2VjyGZ7XVksXu5p27zHJCRJix6rAK0fGi1iRZfSr6
WV7pIVashC+wqcQec53h6c7m0/u81GcQgjwD6HGf7wQTuoqiQYB0043KTXBysRmt
CJvg5SLxatI=
=TkSd
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


Mime
View raw message