On benchmarks, on bias, on the Beeb, on Linux, on the Xbox

An excellent piece by Mario Rodrigues. He fails to mention one criterion which distinguishes "useful" benchmarks (like the Real World Benchmarks used by Computer Buyer and PC Pro) and "window dressing" benchmarks and that is accuracy.

There are loads of benchmarks which will tell you the score for a PC or component but none of them publishes its margin of error. In fact it is rumoured that some well known benchmarks have a margin of error of 5% or more.

If vendors or chip makers are using one of these benchmark suites to claim, for example, that Cheeteron is 3% faster than Pantheron then they're talking bolloks as the margin of error is greater than what they are trying to measure. It's like using your thumb to measure the width of a human hair.

Our own application-based Real World Benchmarks have a margin of error that is usually somewhere below ±0.25%.

Now that's what I call a useful benchmark test.

Derek Cohen
Editorial Director, Dennis Publishing

Finland "moves to Windows, not Linux"

Surely the headline is wrong. Some along the lines" Finland upgrades windows yet again" and it cost them thousands (millions maybe).

Ok I am biased as I use Linux on my desktop, at least at home and I don't think "Theinquirer" is at all biased towards Linux. Quite the opposite judging from what the site is built from. I do agree with the editors, I don't find any thing news worthy in a windows upgrade cycle apart from maybe what these suckers spend.

tony, email address supplied

Mike,

I have a tip in which you may be interested. I'm considering buying a copy of Quicken Premier 2003. Being a conscientious respecter of intellectual property rights, I tried to get a copy of Intuit's end user license agreement for this product. It's not on their web site. On calling both technical support and customer support, they tell me that they are unable to supply it to me, and that I have to buy the product to view it. That is, I must pay money before deciding if I want to be bound by the purchase contract they are offering.

Two points are interesting here: 1. Doesn't this negate the very premise of a click through license agreement? Aren't people normally allowed to review the terms of an agreement, especially if they ask nicely, before consumating it with a money payment?

2. What are they hiding?

You want to do some investigative reporting rather than just throwing around sophomoric terms such as "Itanic"? Investigate that.

Steve, email address supplied

Letter about a letter...

"Its easy for the uninformed reader to get the impression there is scarcely any good coming from big business, as well as the U.S. government. ... "

Interesting point of view. As the U.S. administration's paid PR people constantly inundate us about what a wonderful job they (and therefore the U.S.) do, and how big business is helping us, despite U.S. investors having lost 60% or more of our money due to fraud and theft by those corporations that are so wonderful, I don't know how we can get this opinion, unless we do not listen to the major networks in the U.S.

(Unless, of course, the poster is complaining about the view that non-U.S. residents get...in that case, they probably get the inverse.)

During the last U.S. presidential election, both the Republican and Democratic leading candidates told us that among their goals was supporting businesses...that support for large corporations was essential to the well being of the U.S. We heard this and read this daily, if not more often, from both parties. I'm not against business, don't get me wrong. I like having mass produced PCs!

I have found several of the articles on your website complain about monopolistic practices, which are illegal in the U.S. Hopefully, the Federal Trade Commission in the U.S. will look into those.

I have seen TheInquirer.net post corrections of data presented earlier that had been corrected. And those corrections were in headlines, so readers could easily see the corrections. I do not see the same happening from President Bush Jr.'s spokesman, or Donald Rumsfeld, who, we would believe, never has told us anything incorrectly....

"double standards that favor "oppressed" groups over others become the norm. "

This certainly happens in the U.S., if one is considered an official minority...for instance if one is say, a Pacific Islander, hispanic, black, "disabled", a woman, or any of the other "minorities." Note: These minorities comprise significantly more than 50% of the population of the U.S...probably closer to 75%

INQUIRER anti-Xbox, Microsoft

It seems that I read a lot of anti-Xbox and anti Microsoft features on theinquirer.com [It's theinquirer.net - don't go to theinquirer.com unless you want a shock, Ed.]. Although I do think your page is nice and often very informative, I think you guys are a little hard on the big M.

I've been hearing anti-M$ stuff for years now, and the amazing thing about it is somehow Microsoft keeps on the edge of innovation and although it throws its money around alot (wouldn't you if you had that much?) business is business, and especially in America, people are all about the almighty buck; and yet still Microsoft is on like 90% (guess) of home computers even worldwide.

Even a lot of Linux and Mac users either use Windows products, simultaneously on the same or more systems. I used DOS, Windows 3.1, 95, 98, NT, 2000, XP, and still use Office too. Windows Media player is great, need i mention Internet Explorer? I have 3 Microsoft sidewinder gamepads, 2 Microsoft intelipoint infrared mice, and two Microsoft natural keyboards, and the gamepads and keyboards i've had for years.

The funny thing is a lot of people who rip on MS all the time use all these same products! I know I'm a pro-MS person so my opinions seem just as biased as the opposing, but don't you think some people are just a LITTLE hard on MS when they have brought so many great products?

Even though they have bought out a lot of companies and people complain about it, do you think the people who sold the businesses to MS were upset with making millions? Not to mention Ms throwing countless dollars at research and development for small businesses to find out about products that may have taken years to develop otherwise?

I'm very impatient with the system that milks the consumers for dollars, and although the Windows installments in the past have been small incremental steps that may not have seemed worthwhile, MS IS getting better and are actually still improving their products. Anyways, my point is Microsoft aint so bad, there's just no one else quite like em and they still seem to beat people's expectations a lot. hope I can make some people see the light and I do respect other people's opinions so I'm not really trying to flame the editor.

Paul, email address supplied

The INQUIRER is run on .NET software. What about the iLoo? - Mike Magee

Does the BBC dislike Microsoft and Apple?

Having lived in the US for the last 3 years and seen the sorry state of affairs which passes for broadcasting in this country, 100 pounds is cheap. The BBC offer far better news, current affairs and entertainment programming than any other service in the world let alone the US. It also offers ground breaking interactive TV services which are not matched by any other service in the world.

All this is done with a budget which is far smaller than any one of the major US networks. If it does not support a certain format then just get over it and listen to something else. Unfortunately the something else is usually so bad that you have no choice but to turn back to the BBC. Case in point is the IRAQ war in which the only new channel which even came close to offering criticism or objective journalism was the BBC. Be glad that there is such an organization in a world of mega corporations who buy influence and power and report the government's propaganda like parrots, and put the minor criticisms some where else.

Regards

Kaushik, email address supplied

And the Blue Scream of Death

Hello Mr. Magee

Something very funny happened to me this morning. I was at the official Microsoft Server 2003 presentations this morning in Quebec City.

The Microsoft spokesman was claiming to the audience that among the "new" virtues of Server 2003 was a much improved stability.

I did not have the time to end his sentence that the audience had the luxury to see, yes, a blue screen.

It is hard to explain the feeling I had when I felt the wave created by the instantaneous and collective laughs, whistles, and applauses of the audience.

Too bad the spokesman was not Bill Gates himself.

Sometimes. life gives us a candy that's very appreciated.

Regards

Paul R, email address supplied