[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: FW: The term "operating system"
I can summarize some details from the article for you:
1) Oranges & old Oranges
They compared NT 4.0 SP3 versus NetWare 4.1. Well, NetWare 4.1
is TWO versions old (Jan 95) & the latest version - IntraNetWare -
came out around the same time as NT 4.0 shipped (about a year ago).
2) Test Server
(page 64) "server ... a generic clone ... 120 Mh Pentium, 64 Meg RAM,
a NE 2000 nic, a master 2.1 gb hard drive and a slave 2.1 gb EIDE hard
drive, with the slave drive partitioned in two equal areas -
one for NTFS, and the other for Novell's file system."
3) Test clients
Six clients (hardware unspecified) running NT workstation 4.0.
For the NetWare test, they use the Microsoft Client Service for NetWare
with Microsoft's SPXLink (ie Microsoft implementatin of IPX/SPX).
4. Test software
The testing was done with something call Dynameasure Enterprise 1.5 from
Bluecurve (http://www.bluecurve.com), which simulates the stress of
multiple users on a single machine. Each client si
5. The test
They tested only filesharing performance, essentially copying files to
and fro, measuring average response time, "motors" per step and total
throughput. A "motor" is a single instance of a simulated user running
on the client, which is running mutiple motors at the same time to
simulate multiple users. (The test seems highly dependent on the
Such a scenario is of course very unlike any real production network.
More interestingly, the Bluecurve testing software is designed to specifically
simulate capacity tests on NT. It is really a scenario deployment tool
for NT and SQL server. If you visit the Bluecurve web
site you will find out they are MS Solution Provider Partner and
doing a tour with MS:
"BluecurveÂ’s Dynameasure product line represents a whole new class of software
tools, and a new way of thinking, of how to deliver a systemic approach to
performance management on Windows NT," said Chuck Dietrick, General
Manager, Microsoft Northern California District. "By partnering with
on this educational seminar series, we are providing the marketplace with a
turnkey solution to many of the questions they might have on deploying and
managing their Windows NT infrastructure."
There is nothing wrong with this and this is not to say they product is not
good: capacity planning for networks is a very very useful tool for
implementation planning, especially for NT, but it obviously was
not designed to do cross OS benchmark tests.
At 05:30 PM 11/14/97 -0500, chuck wrote:
>Christopher Pall[SMTP:firstname.lastname@example.org] writes:
>>>In a similar vein, the latest WindowsNT Magazine has an article
detailing their lab tests
>>>pitting NT head-to-head w/ NetWare 4.11. The only reason I'd take their
>>>yours is that they detail exactely how the experiment was done, what
>>>software was used, what was measured and how the data was interpreted.
One of the
>>>principles of science is that I could recreate and independantly verify
>>>and it's results.
>>To think, a windows NT magazine found NT beating Novell software, wow,
must have been a tremendous
>>leap for them. Where is the URL for this comparison? I'll help you read
through their "results"
>Heh, a very legit response! But like I said, anybody (with the time and
resources) can do the
> - but they haven't posted the data on the web yet. The bastards want us
to go out and buy the atoms.
Randolph W. Thornton
President, The LAN Guide Company