Windows Server 2003: Incompatible, Fast & Confusing

"Is Server 2003 fast? Yes, it's easily outdistances anything that Microsoft has ever shown us before. And, yes, it's faster than Linux. It is stable? Based on about two weeks of testing with the final release, I would say that it's also the most stable Microsoft operating system I've ever seen. But then again, I'm not asking it to do much besides basic file/print. The functionality servers that any business needs are largely not there. Ironically, this reminds me of the old claim against Linux that it didn't have any applications. That was never true of Linux, but it is true of Server 2003." Read the article at Practical-Tech by Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols.

The Must-Fix List For 2.6.0

Andrew Morton posted a lengthy list of items that need to be done before the 2.5 development kernel tree should be turned into the 2.6 stable kernel tree. He prefaced his list by noting that 2.6.0 does not mean, "it's finished, ship it", alternatively offering, "I'd propose that 2.6.0 means that users can migrate from 2.4.x with a good expectation that everything which they were using in 2.4 will continue to work, and that the kernel doesn't crash, doesn't munch their data and doesn't run like a dog. Other definitions are welcome."

My (Ongoing) Linux Odyssey

Compelled by the endless debate of whether Linux is ready for the desktop, I wrote my own rant. It morphed into some kind of "my experience with Linux". This is some kind of long term review of Linux, from the very specific viewpoint of someone who uses it to do research about computers and networks. It is not a distro comparison, or Linux vs Windows TCO comparison, or any such thing. It is just a story about a guy who found Linux.

If I Had My Own Distro

Lately, we've all read a lot of articles about desktop Linux - so many that it's getting hard to tell them apart. One says "Why Linux Sucks," the next "My Success With Linux." Even Michael Robertson of Lindows.com joined the fun with his "Why Desktop Linux Sucks, Today." But very few people have proposed anything radical, and I believe that's what's needed to take GNU/Linux to the next level.

Lab Report: Windows Server 2003 Outperforms Predecessors

VeriTest, an independent test lab, has found that Windows Server 2003 outperforms Microsoft Windows 2000 Server and Microsoft Windows NT Server 4.0 by a dramatic margin—typically performing two to three times faster on the same hardware. Compared to Windows NT Server 4.0, Windows Server 2003 is: Two times faster on average as a file server. Three times faster serving dynamic Web content. Four times faster serving static Web content. Update: Apparently, VeriTest is owned by Lionbridge.