> It is only fair to compare a patched version of the OS.
> Now, I know that some of the purists may disagree with that, but
> if the computer was an automobile, for which the manufacturor acknowledged
> that the fuel injection system had a free upgrade that improved
> one would consider installing it before they challenged another to a race.
I would agree with the fairness, but if a given patch causes program xyz to
dying on bootup, you now have program xyz soaking up more CPU cycles, so
a patched OS is not always faster than the unpatched one. Certainly I would
expect most patches to improve performance, but it's not a given. :-)
Bringing both OSes up to a current patch level and then racing them would be
a more fair comparison, as long as fully patched OSes is the norm in the
world (another given I'm not entirely sure I agree with).
Life is one big gray area after another.