On 31 Jan 2007, at 11:27, Bob Ham wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-01-30 at 23:30 +0100, torbenh@email-addr-hidden wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 09:18:06PM +0000, Bob Ham wrote:
>>> On Tue, 2007-01-30 at 21:05 +0000, Bob Ham wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 2007-01-30 at 09:03 -0800, Michael Ost wrote:
>>>>> Can anyone suggest ways to compare audio/midi performance
>>>>> between Linux
>>>>> and Windows that ... make Linux compare favorably?
>>>>
>>>>> I work for a company that sells a Linux based piece of hardware
>>>>> that
>>>>> plays windows VSTs.
>>>>
>>>> The word "FUD" comes to mind. No idea why.
>>>
>>> Further to that, something constructive: perhaps you could try
>>> telling
>>> your customers why *you* chose linux, rather than trying to find
>>> reasons
>>> to tell them *they* should.
>>
>> the customers dont notice. they still use windows or no computers at
>> all.
>>
>> it looks rather like a question from the management.
>
> You are correct there. From the modern business perspective, though,
> management are Michael's personal customers.
>
> I think the argument still applies. If your goal is to convince
> someone
> that your choice of linux is correct, telling them why you chose linux
> in the first place seems, to me at least, to be the best method,
> rather
> than seeking out reasons which you yourself haven't been concerned
> with
> previously.
I don't think that's necessarily the case, just because Linux had
better RT performance in 2000 doesn't mean it still does today, with
Vista and general improvements.
I think it's reasonable for management to question if it's still the
best choice.
- Steve
Received on Wed Jan 31 16:15:03 2007
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Jan 31 2007 - 16:15:03 EET