EULA and Performance Comparison
Nick Wienholt
on .NET had not been lifted with the RTM of VS.NET and the framework. The
relevant section of the VS.NET EULA states:
"5.9 Benchmark Testing. You may not disclose the results of any benchmark
test of the .NET Framework component of the Product to any third party
without Microsoft's prior written approval."
What is the consequence of this clause? If I say 'using On Error Resume
Next blocks in VB.NET is about x times slower than using a Try Catch block',
am I breaking the EULA. The whole clause seems pretty pointless - I can
build a test harness, and give that out, so everyone can see the perf delta
themselves, but I can't divulge my results.
On a 'here's my opinions front':
* The clause seems to fly against the openness initiative of .NET.
* The clause gives the impression that there are big perf. issues buried in
the framework, and MS is going to come down on any one who divulges them.
This certainly hasn't been the case so far, but it leaves the door open for
this action.
* Did Oracle get written permission for the Pet Store comparison [1].
I don't want to start some huge advocacy debate - there are plenty of other
newsgroups for this - but I want to come to some understanding about the
consequences of the EULA and perf. compressions.
Thanks.
Nick
[1] http://otn.oracle.com/tech/java/oc4j/pdf/9ias_net_bench.pdf
Neil Hodgson
> I was surprised to find that the prohibition on releasing bench mark
results
> on .NET had not been lifted with the RTM of VS.NET and the framework. The
> relevant section of the VS.NET EULA states:
The point of these clauses is normally to try to prevent competitors from
releasing biased benchmarks. They are common in the database world where
applications often need skillful tuning for good performance so its easy to
perform a comparison where you put a lot of effort into your version but
leave the competition with default settings.
I think having this in the EULA is stupid too as it acts as a restriction
on reasonable discussion of performance techniques. If, for eaple, I have
text drawing code that is performing 60% slower under .NET then under Java
then its reasonable to post that on a news group *even if it is caused by
incorrect code on my part*. Then responses can point out problems in my code
or that using a particular rendering option should produce a performance
increase.
Most people posting performance comparison data are doing so because they
want to improve their code or nudge Microsoft into improving the system,
rather than as advocacy.
Neil
Markus Kalina
characteristic to me, I find this clause even from consumer rights
standpoint questionable.
If you, for example, build a house with a certain kind of concrete, you are
allowed to tell everybody how stable that house is and which concrete you
used. If you could not share this information the consumer (house owner and
other builders) would suffer and could not make educated decisions. In
addition, I would aslo dislike living in a house whose concrete supplier
prohibited the builder to talk about its stability.
I think that the consumers should be able to share all the information which
is necessary for them to make an educated buying decision. But maybe that is
just me.
But this is not unique to MS, it is our whole industry.
"Nick Wienholt" <goyou...@hotmail.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:OezYxYR1BHA.2596@tkmsftngp03...
Christoph Nahr
<kal...@octura.com> wrote:
>Since the performance characteristics of the framework is a key
>characteristic to me, I find this clause even from consumer rights
>standpoint questionable.
I agree. Personally I ignore this clause, and I don't think it would
hold up in any court. And so far Microsoft has done nothing to
enforce it, as far as I know -- there are plenty of benchmarks around.
Gunnar Skogsholm
neighborhoods, or the quality of the schools.
Please note that the microsoft clause only applies to people who are current
license holders. A third party could perform tests, and release benchmarks
with impunity, as long as they haven't licensed .NET.
"Markus Kalina" <kal...@octura.com> wrote in message
news:ua2m4t9...@corp.supernews.com...