Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.carno.net.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!munnari.OZ.AU!news.ecn.uoknor.edu!solace!nntp.uio.no!uninett.no!news.netg.se!dd.chalmers.se!news.chalmers.se!dtek.chalmers.se!matso
From: matso@dtek.chalmers.se (Mats Olsson)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc,comp.unix.bsd.bsdi.misc,comp.sys.sgi.misc
Subject: Re: no such thing as a "general user community"
Date: 4 Apr 1997 16:11:35 GMT
Organization: Chalmers University of Technology
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <5i397n$eva@nyheter.chalmers.se>
References: <331BB7DD.28EC@net5.net> <5hnam9$393@hoopoe.psc.edu> <5hp7p3$1qb@fido.asd.sgi.com> <5hqc45$hlm@flea.best.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: gaal.dtek.chalmers.se
Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc:38500 comp.unix.bsd.bsdi.misc:6587 comp.sys.sgi.misc:29699
In article <5hqc45$hlm@flea.best.net>,
Matt Dillon <dillon@flea.best.net> wrote:
> Larry, no matter what the results, you can't seriously be advocating
> that testing two OS's on two different platforms is scientific (!).
> Well? Yes? No?
That depends if the difference between the platforms is significant in
light of the results and what you try to show. Ie, if the results are very
similar and you are trying to show that one OS is better than the other,
then the differences between the systems must be carefully analyzed to
see if they are significant.
So, testing two OS'es on two differenent platforms isn't necessarily
bad science. How the collected data is used can be bad science.
/Mats