Benchmarks...
....are always such a contentious and embattled topic...
No matter what benchmark you run, mostly, invariably someone has a negative/obnoxious comment to
make. If you think otherwise, then write an article and include benchmarks of some sort and get it published.
Then sit back and enjoy the belligerent emails and rude comments. So why is this? Well, I think it's a combination
of a couple of factors. There are two pervasive emotional factors in benchmark-bashing. One is when a beloved
and heroic operating system or beloved application ends on the losing end to some vile, contemptible waste-of-time
operating system or application. Such choices in operating systems, applications, hardware, choice in databases etc.,
are very personal, so it's easy for some people to take results of a benchmark as an affront to one's manhood.
The problem is that benchmarks, by their very nature, are narrow in scope and fail to encompass the complexity of an
operating system, application,or hardware platform. As a result, someone with even a mediocre knowledge of the
technology can easily poke holes, and make themselves seem smart in the process. But that's not what benchmarks are
varying depths of exploration into unknown territory. Sometimes they can be very comprehensive, and other times they
can be very simple. They answer only the questions they are asked, and can provide a basis for asking other questions.
If I ever do a review and you want to make a point, drop me a line.
If you're polite about it, I'm happy to discuss it and I'll even take suggestions for other benchmarks. If you enjoy making
obnoxious remarks about benchmarks done by myself or others, then write/do your own benchmarks, write it up in an
article, and get it published. No one's stopping you doing that and it's not all that difficult, isn't it?
So keep that in mind, as you read/use my reviews and benchmarks and as you read/use benchmarks from others.
Many thanks Tony for his assistance writing this, you know what I mean my friend.
