"I realize that this comes as a shock to some of the SD people, but I'm told that there was a university group that did some double-blind testing of the different schedulers - old, SD and CFS - and that everybody agreed that both SD and CFS were better than the old, but that there was no significant difference between SD and CFS."
So why was CFS picked instead of SD? SD was written by a hobby hacker (CK), who's an anesthesiologist in real life, while CFS was written by a professional hacker (IM), who's actually just that in real life. Keep in mind that by 2008, the times where kernel development was driven by people who'd code for it in their spare time without commercial interests was over for good. Was mattered most was having a maintainer who can work on it full-time.
Personally, I can't imagine Linux without BFS anymore. I'm happy CK is still around and making my desktop better. I also find it amazing how people can be so hostile (as apposed to just criticize the work on technical merits) to someone who's providing something for free, in his spare time, on a "I hope this works for you too" basis. If you it doesn't work for you, don't use it. The world does not owe you anything.