Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 17th Nov 2010 23:10 UTC, submitted by Debjit
Internet Explorer There's a bit of a ruckus on the web about how Microsoft was supposedly cheating when it comes to Internet Explorer 9's performance on benchmarks. Digitizor, as well as some enterprising readers over at HackerNews, came to the conclusion that Microsoft included code in IE9 specifically to ace the SunSpider benchmark. I was ready to write a scathing article about this, - until I loaded up the IEBlog. As it turns, it's not cheating, it's not a bug - it's an actual piece of smart code optimisation other browsers don't have yet.
Thread beginning with comment 450406
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: It isn't cheating, but
by lemur2 on Thu 18th Nov 2010 01:46 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: It isn't cheating, but"
lemur2
Member since:
2007-02-17

My post was a joke... Sorry if that wasn't obvious. That aside, if you want a serious response. I don't care what Microsoft's PR people say, just as I don't generally care what any PR people say - their job is to present a version of the truth that suits their employers desired outcome. Just to push the point, benchmarking a product in order to give developers feedback to improve it is a useful exercise. The minute you (as in the software developer) publish the benchmark you are in PR territory and caveat emptor to the reader. I'm not saying that all PR in the software world is veiled deception, but it sure as hell can be, and it doesn't matter who the company is. There isn't much use in pointing fingers at them when they twist the truth, you may as well blame a skunk for stinking... And no, I don't think it is particularly funny or surprising that some actual developers at MS don't agree with how PR characterizes their work - that is probably true of any software company. You may not like MS, but they employ quite a lot of intelligent developers, and most intelligent people who work hard at what they do don't like their work being distilled down to sound bites and promoted like it was a soft drink - it cheapens what is otherwise a satisfying experience (i.e. trying to write better software). So I would expect any good software company to have a few developers that don't tow the PR party line - it is a sign of health if you ask me. Its the companies that manage to present a single unified message to the outside world without a single voice of dissent in sight which you should be frightened of...


Sorry, you are right, I didn't pick up on the joke in your post. I read it too quickly. Pardon me.

Fair enough, yours is a pretty reasonable attitude actually. So too is the apparent attitude of the Microsoft developers.

One small part of my complaint is that this is not what ordinary people get to hear.

A larger part of my complaint is that websites such as Ars Technica should know better, and they should present material like this (performance comparisons) with a bit of technical balance to it, and do some investigations of their own, and not simply regurgitate what Microsoft marketing PR has to say. We all know how reliable Microsoft PR and marketing is liable to be ... which is to say, not one bit reliable.

The most significant part of what I would say about all this is for people to take this as a lesson learned. There are a few useful "rules to live by" that can be gleaned from this:
(1) Do not believe what mainstream media is trying to tell you without examining it at least a little bit for yourself. "Follow the money" is a good rule of thumb to use to sort out what is really going on.
(2) Look at whatever Microsoft marketing say, and then examine what they do NOT say about a topic. The latter examination is most likely to uncover some actual truth.
(3) If someone makes a counter-claim about a talking point that Microsoft marketing are pushing, do not discount out of hand what the naysayers have to say. Microsoft marketing and PR most definitely has an agenda. "Follow the money" once again is a good rule of thumb.

Reply Parent Score: 2