Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : How high will Microsoft fly? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: keithsha who wrote (66482)	3/28/2002 1:38:17 PM
From: Charles Tutt	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74651

"Fact: the TPC-C benchmarks for large scale DBMS applications show that Windows is the fastest platform in the world, using COM+ as a transaction monitor BTW. Top 3 spots and 6 of the top ten." Show me the two results on identical hardware configurations that demonstrate your assertion. Oh, BTW: tpc.org Charles Tutt (SM)

To: keithsha who wrote (66482)	3/28/2002 2:56:32 PM
From: dybdahl	Respond to of 74651

We have lots of information. What is needed, is not information or facts, but relevant information and facts. COM is only the framework for creating OLE, and linking objects is only one of the things you can do with COM. Saying that object linking is successful because COM is successful gives as much meaning as saying that Microsoft Bob is successful because Windows is sold in many copies. TPC-C does not measure COM performance. It measures database performance. Your logic about TPC-C -> DBMS performance -> COM performance compared to single-file executables doesn't belong in a forum of intelligent people. And I can assure you, that COM+ transactions is added overhead, and absolutely doesn't contribute to added performance. COM+ is about functionality, making things possible easier. Overhead also makes COM slower than not using COM, but the main reason why COM is slower is that it access more files than if the code is compiled into a single executable. MAPI is not a protocol - it's an API. Guess where the last three letters in MAPI come from. Your fact is btw totally irrelevant, since the topic is about using open standards inherently or as an add-on. And http is an add-on to Exchange, not something used inherently during normal communication between Outlook and the server. I don't want to start a discussion about the Kerberos issue, but Microsoft did use the embrace and extend method here, that's a relevant fact. And their PR handling this was awful. I'm sorry I have to say this, but your post is somewhere between spam and stupid. Please improve.