I don't agree with many (most) of sundialsvc4's posts, but in this specific case, at least some of it makes sense, please don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. Especially the difference between IO-bound processes and CPU-bound processes does make sense, even though modern CPU with, among other things, their multiple cores and advanced multi-layered caching strategies, make it very difficult to predict performance. Only benchmarking can really sort out these things.
But, yes, the difference between IO-bound processes and CPU-bound processes is still a good starting point to try to understand what is going on.
please don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.
Whilst I applaud your tolerance -- as a windows user who was denigrated here for no more reason than that when I first came here -- you make the following mistakes:
You take what he says in isolation.
By failing to consider his past postings, you make the mistake of assuming there is some insight behind *this* post.
You ignore the Law of Averages.
If you say one of the same 6 things in response to 4518 posts, you are on average going to be somewhere in the ball park some small percentage of the time.
But if you take the few percentage of those 4518 times that he got something close to being correct as a sign that he knew what he was saying, you do this place -- and all those that expend their energies here to help others -- a disservice.
And you give succour to the stickiest blanket sticker I've ever had the misfortune to encounter.
With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'
Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.