On Sep 25, 1:56 pm, "Clogwog" <BWAHAHAH...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> http://blogs.zdnet.com/microsoft/?p=1606
> "The blog entry about the 34-page report
A report funded by Microsoft, reviewed by Microsoft, with changes
recommended or requested by Microsoft. Obviously Microsoft got the
changes it wanted or they wouldn't be on record as funding it.
> comes just days after Microsoft
> announced that Peru had become the
> first customer to take shipment of One
> Laptop Per Child (OLPC) XO machines
> preloaded with Windows XP.
So the Vital_Wave report was done without actual studies of actual
deployments of Windows XP on OLPC. They simply ASSUMED that an OLPC
running on Windows would cost exactly the same as an OLPC running
Linux, that the standard OLPC would have exactly the same
functionality with Linux or Windows.
Yet experience has shown that Linux requires less hardware (RAM, ROM,
CPU speed, Storage), provides more functionality (Full open office vs
works - a minimally functional version of Office).
It's pretty obvious that they didn't even actually do real tests with
real equipment configured as it would actually be used in the class-
room.
Other assumptions were based on those original assumptions, for
example, they assumed that both would take the same amount of hardware
and would therefore burn the same amount of electricity. Yet XP takes
longer to boot, requires more memory, and requires more storage. This
increases the power consumption requirements.
They also assumed that Linux support staff would be more expensive.
Yet experience has shown that, for a given level of support, the costs
of Linux support are lower, because one Linux administrator can manage
more systems, and can do more to make sure that problems are resolved
and don't recur.
> Microsoft finalized the testing and development
> of its port of XP to the OLPC earlier this summer."
> <aside>
> Roy's spambot missed this one!
Roy tends to post the articles where the comparisons favor Linux.
Perhaps you should provide references to articles similar to this one,
where Microsoft "appears" to be superior to Linux.
I rather enjoyed reading the actual report being quoted, and seeing
the actual assumptions being used, and noticing that the assumptions
didn't match actual experience.
Look at the ASUS EEE, the XP version requires 1 gig of RAM.
|
|
