dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
3694
share rss forum feed


rexbinary
Mod King
Premium
join:2005-01-26
Plano, TX
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
reply to darthanubis

Re: Ubuntu 13.04 Linux Can Outperform Apple OS X 10.8.3

said by darthanubis:

Do you have anything to say about the tests, methodology, anything of substance?

You posted the link for opinions, you got mine.


clarknova

join:2010-02-23
Grande Prairie, AB
kudos:7
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
reply to darthanubis

I think it's important to make good comparisons from time to time. Most people aren't going to choose their OS based on small differences in performance, but until the benchmarking is done, how does one know that the differences are small?

It's good to know that Linux is keeping up on most measures, or not, as the case may be, so that developers and managers know where to focus their efforts.
--
db


darthanubis

join:2010-01-05
Cleveland, OH
Reviews:
·Comcast
reply to darthanubis

So, no one has anything to add relevant to the actual tests done in the article. Just attack the site (ad hominem)"I saw the word Phoronix and I was like poo poo" or something. Attack a straw-man (influencing the choosing of one or the other OS, which the article makes no claims of trying to do) particularly hilarious, yet at least one person fell for it. And lastly, personal antedotes, about what feels good to do. That is cool, but still is off topic to the article.

Contrary to the main derailleur of the thread, the article was not posted to get opinions that don't address the article. If the article is of no import why respond to the thread at all?

The article and site may be fail, but the responses to the article and this thread are just as bad.
--
Processor: Intel Core 2 Quad CPU Q9550 @ 2.83GHz (Total Cores: 4) Graphics: GeForce GT 240 1024MB (550/790MHz)
Motherboard: ASUSTeK P5Q SE2 Audio: VIA VT1708S
Chipset: Intel 4 Series Chipset + ICH10
Memory: 8003MB
Disk: 60GB OCZ-VERTEX2



intok

join:2012-03-15

1 recommendation

Well Larebel does have a long history of reporting absolutely nothing, the only reason to go is the cometary from the AMD and Intel devs, just look at his R600 shader optimization tests from a few days ago and what was just submitted by a reader. Theres no reason that if he wasn't getting any difference in his testing that he shouldn't have done the due diligence to find out why and correct it instead of rushing to print as soo as he's found as many linkbacks to phoronix as he can possibly fit into every article and still have room left over for in-line advertising.

Phoronix is stuffed to the gills with articles like that, hence why nobody has taken anything Larabel has had to say seriously in at least 5 years. When you call him out on it he just complains about people using Adblock* and trolls demoralizing him.

*Phoronix has more ads then a free TGP porn site, just take a look with no adblocking enabled.


darthanubis

join:2010-01-05
Cleveland, OH

Thank you. At least that explains why there were no serious critiques.



billaustin
they call me Mr. Bill
Premium,MVM
join:2001-10-13
North Las Vegas, NV
kudos:3

said by darthanubis:

Thank you. At least that explains why there were no serious critiques.

I felt it a very serious critique of the article when I posted this: "However, according to the test notes, the Nvidia graphics were disabled and only the Intel GPU used for all tests because Ubuntu Linux doesn't run as well with the Nvidia GPU."

Quoted directly from the article: "While there's also NVIDIA graphics onboard this MacBook Pro, due to the rather non-pleasant state of switchable graphics on Linux, all OSes were limited to using the Intel integrated graphics."

I view that as an invalidation of the video performance results by manipulating the tests to favor Linux. It also makes all the other results suspect.

Since you don't seem to like our responses, I would like to hear from you. What is the point in doing a performance comparison between OS X and Linux using Apple Hardware?

If the author were to build a Hackintosh system using the most 'compatible' parts available, and then do a performance comparison between OS X and Linux on the system, I would find that a somewhat interesting read.


mxmumtuna

join:2000-08-11
Ashburn, VA
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
reply to rexbinary

said by rexbinary:

I think very few people pick their operating system based on performance, so these benchmarks are irrelevant.

I think this sums it up well. OS is chosen (if indeed one chooses it) because it best suits the tasks at hand. If Photoshop or MS Office pays your rent, you're not going to run Linux. If you spend all day in a UNIX terminal, you may not want to use Windows. If you only care about games, you'd probably want Windows. It just depends on your use case.

darthanubis

join:2010-01-05
Cleveland, OH
Reviews:
·Comcast

It sums up nothing related to this article at all. What motivates people to use x or y is an entirely different question, not posed by the article. Am I really the only one that gets that? Serious question. Please quote the part that makes that argument?


darthanubis

join:2010-01-05
Cleveland, OH
Reviews:
·Comcast
reply to billaustin

said by billaustin:

said by darthanubis:

Thank you. At least that explains why there were no serious critiques.

What is the point in doing a performance comparison between OS X and Linux using Apple Hardware?

If the author were to build a Hackintosh system using the most 'compatible' parts available, and then do a performance comparison between OS X and Linux on the system, I would find that a somewhat interesting read.

What a facile question. The easy answer, from TFA , and all the other FAs, is to compare the OSes as "out of the box" ie fresh installs of Ubuntu vs. Fresh OSX on comparable hardware. No one gets a Hackintosh out the box.

Also, OSX running on Mac hardware should be a huge advantage that does not seem to be seen from the site's review. It has gone back and forth with OSX beating out Ubuntu a few releases ago.

Is anyone else making these comparisons that anyone here can respect? If so, I'd love to read those benchmarks/site(s).
--
Processor: Intel Core 2 Quad CPU Q9550 @ 2.83GHz (Total Cores: 4) Graphics: GeForce GT 240 1024MB (550/790MHz)
Motherboard: ASUSTeK P5Q SE2 Audio: VIA VT1708S
Chipset: Intel 4 Series Chipset + ICH10
Memory: 8003MB
Disk: 60GB OCZ-VERTEX2


billaustin
they call me Mr. Bill
Premium,MVM
join:2001-10-13
North Las Vegas, NV
kudos:3

You seem to gloss over and miss many points made by others to promote your agenda, whatever it is.

From a technical standpoint, some may find the comparison of two Unix-like Operating Systems on hardware sold by one OS provider interesting. For a real-world approach, they are useless.

No one in their right mind would spend the extra money to buy a Mac to run Linux on it. So again, the question: What is the point in doing a rigged performance comparison between OS X and Linux using Apple Hardware?

No one may get a Hackintosh 'fresh out of the box' like a Mac or Windows system, but no one gets a 'Ubuntu Linux' system 'fresh out of the box' either. The Hackintosh comment was just an aside as to what I would find interesting. At least, though, it would provide a fair comparison using the same hardware that was not sold by a specific manufacturer for a specific OS.

OS X should perform comparably to any other OS on Apple hardware, especially now that it is fairly standard components from providers like Intel and Nvidia (though grossly over-priced). However, as I pointed out several times, the tests were rigged to favor Linux by disabling the Nvidia GPU, which makes them meaningless. The only area where Ubuntu Linux really excelled in those rigged tests was the file-system performance, and those are of little concern to the average purchaser of a Mac Laptop.


darthanubis

join:2010-01-05
Cleveland, OH

I stopped reading at "promote my agenda".

So now it is a conspiracy?

So much fail in this thread. So now you attack the messenger.

One logical fallacy upon another.



intok

join:2012-03-15
reply to billaustin

Or... It's just yet another attempt by Larabel to get ad hits by using anything Apple to get it circulated on the news link aggregators to get the Mac users to go look at his crappy site.



billaustin
they call me Mr. Bill
Premium,MVM
join:2001-10-13
North Las Vegas, NV
kudos:3

said by intok:

Or... It's just yet another attempt by Larabel to get ad hits by using anything Apple to get it circulated on the news link aggregators to get the Mac users to go look at his crappy site.

I believe you are correct on that point.


billaustin
they call me Mr. Bill
Premium,MVM
join:2001-10-13
North Las Vegas, NV
kudos:3
reply to darthanubis

said by darthanubis:

I stopped reading at "promote my agenda".

So now it is a conspiracy?

...

Indicating that you may have your own agenda for posting does not make an accusation of conspiracy. If I was going to bring up conspiracy claims, I would have indicated that I think you are a stooge posting here to drive hits to Larabel's site. I have not accused you of that.

said by darthanubis:

...

So much fail in this thread. ...

That you started, and continue to add to, without providing anything of substance.

said by darthanubis:

... So now you attack the messenger.

...

Please show where I have attacked you. I only indicated that your posting here could be to support some agenda other than a reasonable discussion.

said by darthanubis:

...
One logical fallacy upon another.

You have failed to refute any of the logic I have discussed. You gloss over it and accuse me of attacking you.

I find the original linked article to be a big 'fail' providing no value to those who took the time to read it.

I'm mostly yanking your chain because you won't even provide a logical response or engage in a reasonable discussion to the point's I have raised.


ImpldConsent
Under Siege
Premium
join:2001-03-04
Mcdonough, GA
Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
·magicjack.com
reply to intok

said by intok:

Or... It's just yet another attempt by Larabel to get ad hits by using anything Apple to get it circulated on the news link aggregators to get the Mac users to go look at his crappy site.

That, I believe, is the answer.
--
That's "MISTER" Kafir to you.

darthanubis

join:2010-01-05
Cleveland, OH
Reviews:
·Comcast

1 edit

Yeah, screw that guy for being a capitalist and doing what everyone else does. All his tests be damned. Even if the test are flawed he is bringing attention to "All things Linux".

Ninety percent of these replies are OT.

Attack the methodology of his tests, not the person.

If you have nothing to add regarding the test. Why post? People will still visit the site regardless of how some feel.

I was accused of having an agenda. While that was a direct attack on me, without basis, it was allowed to stand.

What is the agenda of those who wish to attack the messengers of this article?

Christ, all I did was drop a link I though would be fuel for intellectually honest discussion. Had I known it was going to elicit this nonsense, I'd have passed.

There obviously won't be a discussion on this thread, just tin foil nuttery, and finger pointing, so just lock the thread already.

Cheers!



markofmayhem
Why not now?
Premium
join:2004-04-08
Pittsburgh, PA
kudos:5

1 recommendation

said by darthanubis:

Even if the test are flawed he is bringing attention to "All things Linux".

Is accuracy and integrity really the first things "All things Linux" should be throwing away? Is there a good, solid reason why we must flaw tests in order to discuss Linux performance? Can Linux not outperform without cooking the tests?

It is bad, all around. Flawed "scientific" tests makes the victor look bad. Attention does not need bought with "flawed" tests, especially since true cross-platform performance testing, including comparing desktops to tablets/phones, has arrived. Anand performed many tests in this manner, none of which were admittedly "flawed" for the sake of putting any regurgitated mess of words out on the intarnetses.
--
Show off that hardware: join Team Discovery and Team Helix


GILXA1226
Premium,MVM
join:2000-12-29
Dayton, OH

1 recommendation

reply to darthanubis

said by darthanubis:

Attack the methodology of his tests, not the person.

Ok, the fact he ran the tests using only the intel graphics card, because that is all Ubuntu could easily use, gave an unfair advantage to Ubuntu because OS X can fully utilize both video cards for what it does. To use a car analogy, your racing two cars, a 4 cylinder and a v8, but have rigged the v-8 to only be able to run on 4 of it's cylinders, who do you think would win?
--
We don't give a d@mn for the whole state of Michigan... we're from OHIO! O!H! ... I!O!

darthanubis

join:2010-01-05
Cleveland, OH
reply to markofmayhem

Thank you.

Seriously. I'll look into Anand's test.


darthanubis

join:2010-01-05
Cleveland, OH
reply to GILXA1226

Thank you as well.



intok

join:2012-03-15
reply to darthanubis

said by darthanubis:

Yeah, screw that guy for being a capitalist and doing what everyone else does. All his tests be damned. Even if the test are flawed he is bringing attention to "All things Linux".

Ninety percent of these replies are OT.

Attack the methodology of his tests, not the person.

If you have nothing to add regarding the test. Why post? People will still visit the site regardless of how some feel.

I was accused of having an agenda. While that was a direct attack on me, without basis, it was allowed to stand.

What is the agenda of those who wish to attack the messengers of this article?

Christ, all I did was drop a link I though would be fuel for intellectually honest discussion. Had I known it was going to elicit this nonsense, I'd have passed.

There obviously won't be a discussion on this thread, just tin foil nuttery, and finger pointing, so just lock the thread already.

Cheers!

I've personally pointed out flaws in his methodology to him directly on his forums, he doesn't care, he is only looking for a quick advertising buck.

Attack the messenger because Larabel is doing a disservice to the Linux community with his extremely low quality of testing, writing and constant smearing of hardware companies for "attacking open source" when it's clear from the article the only person he's talked to is some first tier outsourced phone service "tech" that everyone gets when they call the tech support number for any company.

His blatant fanboisim for Valve and Unigine, completely ignoring games from other companies unless they are major announcements like something from DoubleFine. Completely ignoring the other gaming services for Linux like Desura and Gamolith, even though Desura still to this day has a larger library of Linux titles, it even has "AAA" games like the Fallout series preFallout 3.

You want ad hit whoring? Look up the once a month every month for 3 years of "STEAM FOR LINUX WILL BE OUT THIS WEEK!!!" articles even at a point when Valve staff was saying in interviews that there wouldn't be any Steam for Linux, it seems to only be a decision made after it started looking like Microsoft and Apple where going to start their own stores and force them out of the market so they had to do something to head them off.

darthanubis

join:2010-01-05
Cleveland, OH
Reviews:
·Comcast

said by intok:

You want ad hit whoring? Look up the once a month every month for 3 years of "STEAM FOR LINUX WILL BE OUT THIS WEEK!!!" articles even at a point when Valve staff was saying in interviews that there wouldn't be any Steam for Linux, it seems to only be a decision made after it started looking like Microsoft and Apple where going to start their own stores and force them out of the market so they had to do something to head them off.

lol.

I remember that. But the rest of your informed experience shared was an education. That is what I was accustom to from this forum when I started reading this site, so many years ago, and why I've been lurking ever since.

Decided to contribute a bit.

But, thank you as well.

Cheers!
--
Processor: Intel Core 2 Quad CPU Q9550 @ 2.83GHz (Total Cores: 4) Graphics: GeForce GT 240 1024MB (550/790MHz)
Motherboard: ASUSTeK P5Q SE2 Audio: VIA VT1708S
Chipset: Intel 4 Series Chipset + ICH10
Memory: 8003MB
Disk: 60GB OCZ-VERTEX2