Date: Sun, 8 Jun 1997 04:18:23 -0700 (PDT) From: "Jonathan M. Bresler" <jmb> To: pgiffuni@fps.biblos.unal.edu.co (Pedro F. Giffuni) Cc: michaelv@MindBender.serv.net, msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au, stefan@exis.net, jdd@vbc.net, freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Exchange vs. Notes Message-ID: <199706081118.EAA09118@hub.freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <33999E2E.719D@fps.biblos.unal.edu.co> from "Pedro F. Giffuni" at Jun 7, 97 10:45:18 am
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Pedro F. Giffuni wrote: > > Michael L. VanLoon -- HeadCandy.com wrote: > > > > On the other hand, the places where Exchange shines, are medium sized > > companies to mega corporations, where commercial support is not only > > preferred, but often required. > > > The mega corporations simply don't like risks: they use what everyone > uses. If exchange and/or Notes is more popular is not a good way to > determine which is (as you say) faster and better. At least I can run a > Notes server from UNIX, no chance on ever seeing that on Exchange. its not risk that bothers them. they want to have (must have) someone or some company they can point to when the box fails. the motivating factor seems to be shifting the blame some where else. (manager: you aint putting my job on the line!) whether the results works or not may be irrelevant. know of a company that chose NT for a webserver. NT doing reverse DNS lost threads till teh box crashed. they wer rebooting 3x a day. but that was okay ;) they dont buy softare. they buy protection from critism. jmb
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199706081118.EAA09118>