I don't see anything to refute here. Note that they are specifically comparing the mainframe with Linux to Intel with Windows. This says nothing about Linux vs. Windows. It just shows that mainframe hardware is expensive.
The reasons for using a mainframe to run Linux have to do with reliability, and service. If you want a cheep web server then Intel is the way to go (although Linux on the same Intel hardware would be lower cost). -----Original Message----- From: Matt Lashley/SCO [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 2004 8:11 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Answers to Microsoft's Mainframe Benchmark Project I haven't followed the list as much as I'd like lately, can someone direct me to a rebuttal of this: http://download.microsoft.com/download/7/3/e/73e77129-db34-4c95-b182-ab0b9bd50081/MainframeBenchmarkProj.pdf I only just discovered the link above after seeing a full page ad extolling Windows 2003 in CIO insight that directed reader to a URL ending in "getthefacts". (The ad was quite near the front - someone spent some bucks.) If there is a response to this, formal or otherwise, I'd enjoy giving it a read. Thanks, Matt Lashley Idaho State Controller's Office ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
