Ramdisks - Now We Are Talking Hyperspace

Re:Ramdisks - Now We Are Talking Hyperspace by maukdaddy on Tuesday June 23, 2009 @08:04PM (#671366)

This article exemplifies one problem with the Linux/tech crowd. All that text and command line output - and not a single damn graph on the page! One graph showing speed differences would eliminate the need for tons of text on that page.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Ramdisks - Now We Are Talking Hyperspace by sp332 on Tuesday June 23, 2009 @08:59PM (#671409)

  Hard disk: _                     100 MB/s
  Ram disk : ____________________ 2000 MB/s

'K?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Ramdisks - Now We Are Talking Hyperspace by lsb on Tuesday June 23, 2009 @10:11PM (#671475)

No, but that's not the point: anyone can be cajoled into making a graph (and I love ASCII art as much as anyone), but the fact that there wasn't the culture of putting a pretty ribbon on nice results, that's the problem.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Ramdisks - Now We Are Talking Hyperspace by patio11 on Tuesday June 23, 2009 @11:35PM (#671535)

Additionally, there is not-universal-but-fairly-widespread culture of contempt for folks who make suggestions like that. "Bah, typical Excel user with your useless eye-candy and summaries and obsession with ease of use."

I wrote an article some months back about competing with OSS, which included some very basic advice like "If you offer software for download, you should have a prominent button which lets people download your software". I did not anticipate this recommendation would be controversial. I got some absolutely priceless comments about it. My two favorites: users who can't find the software without a big ugly button don't deserve to have it, and technically disinclined users who are attempting to install software from the Internet are already doing something wrong, they should be getting it from their distro's repo instead.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Ramdisks - Now We Are Talking Hyperspace by sp332 on Tuesday June 23, 2009 @11:24PM (#671527)

Real life is not that simple. Many times, graphs and charts (especially when they replace actual numbers) can be misleading, even unintentionally. In this article, you could focus on IOPS, if your target workload is sensitive to that. Or you could think about maximum bandwidth, or number of rack units required, or the fact that one of the options requires special drivers and multiple PCI-e channels, and so on. Just throwing a graph up would hide a lot of useful information, and encourage knee-jerk reactions to the article. We all know from the Megahertz Wars that this isn't good for anybody. Pretty graphs have their place in pop-tech pieces, but this article was more useful in just two pages than most of those articles are in ten pages of graphs.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Ramdisks - Now We Are Talking Hyperspace by ersi on Wednesday June 24, 2009 @02:32AM (#671709)

I'd rather have content than a graph. Comfortably I'd like both.

Graphs without much content, which is the leading combination these days - especially around "tech", business, economics sites/"content", is pretty damn annoying and it makes it feel a lot more cheap.

I do agree that a graph would be a nice complement. Even if the "problem with Linux/tech crowd" was pretty unnecessary.

[ Parent | on HN ]