[markn]

I wonder if they manipulated this like they manipulate the polls (http://news.zdnet.co.uk/story/0,,t269-s2102244,00.html).

[go star go]

yeah. they manupilated it. they made windows and sql server perform better. damn them cheaters.

WHAT A BUNCH OF WHINEY BABIES!

[go star go]

of course it could just be that they manupliated it by rebooting 169 times during the test...

just how redicules can people be...

[Bush2000]

I wonder if they manipulated this like they manipulate the polls (http://news.zdnet.co.uk/story/0,,t269-s2102244,00.html).

Rrrrrright. Cuz, God knows, it's impossible to impersonate somebody posting from the microsoft.com domain... </sarcasm>

[Dominic Harr]

I wonder if they manipulated this like they manipulate the polls

More Free MS Adverstising? Is FR now the MS newswire?

This is pure propaganda. He couldn't get away with this on any technical board, where people would laugh him out of the joint.

A look at the Systems Tested in that test show that no high-end Sun machines were tested, and the MS machine that got the top results -- a Compaq ProLiant DL760-900-256P -- costs $10,603,803. The best IBM machine they tested Oracle on was an HP 9000 Superdome Enterprise Server -- costs $8,272,786.

Leave out Suns, spend $2.4 mil more on the Windows box, and don't even test Linux.

I especially love giving MS $2.4 mil more in hardware. Now *that* is a fine way to cook the books.