Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1998 12:20:13 +0200 From: Johann Visagie <wjv@cityip.co.za> To: pat.groce@state.sd.us Cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: unix is a problem: free bsd doesn't help Message-ID: <19981110122013.B1380@cityip.co.za> In-Reply-To: <5D2C95997022D21187350008C7F4CF793E6C00@ESPR1SRV5.state.sd.us>; from pat.groce@state.sd.us on Mon, Nov 09, 1998 at 11:30:10AM -0600 References: <5D2C95997022D21187350008C7F4CF793E6C00@ESPR1SRV5.state.sd.us>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi Pat, I've followed the rambunctious thread that you started off on the FreeBSD-questions list. I don't have too many comments; hidden amongst all the flames, many other people have already given you good advice. However, I think even you must admit that the following statement, taken in context, is rather amusing: On Mon, 09 Nov 1998 at 11:30 SAST, pat.groce@state.sd.us wrote: > > The web page at http://www.freebsd.org/handbook/install.html made it all > sound so simple. I didn't know there were hidden issues! Errr, hello? "I'm sorry, sir, I tried to install this rather complex NOS. I _thought_ I'd just be able to click a button and our entire network would be configured, including our Web server, proxy, and the news server. But somehow that didn't happen. BUT HOW WAS I SUPPOSED TO KNOW THERE WERE HIDDEN ISSUES?" :-) Installing and running a NOS, _any_ NOS, is not child's play. This goes doubly for any Unix. Unix is incredibly powerful and flexible, but it can also be extremely knowledge-intensive. (Note that I do not say _labour_-intensive, as it is quite possible to run Unix boxes which operate for months, or even years, without human intervention. But to do that, you have to put in the required amount of brainwork at the start.) I often say (only half in jest) that I know no part-time Unix system administrators. They tend to be a semi-fanatical bunch who spend _all_ their spare time hacking away at their systems, streamlining a little process here, polishing a script there, and just generally increasing their own knowledge base in the process. NT, on the other hand, with its habit of hiding the real complexity from you, is well suited to part-time administrators. Look at it this way: I have the habit of _always_ putting my car keys in the same drawer. Always. I never have to think about where my keys are - I just open the drawer. Every now and again - maybe once a year - I manage to put my keys somewhere else for whatever reason. When I then open that drawer, I enter a complete and total state of panic. Since I'm not used to remembering where I put my keys, I don't even have a _clue_ where to start looking. NT is a bit like that. It's fine while everything works. But the day something goes wrong (or the day you want to do something just a little bit out of the ordinary), prepare for a coronary. This isn't an NT bash, BTW. I even go so far as to recommend NT to some of my clients. People who want to (say) run their own Web server and who do not have the required level of experience to operate a Unix box... well, I have better things to do than to hold their hands all the time, so I point them at NT. The fact that running NT is far less a labour of love can be a bonus in many commercial situations. Now, here's my suggestion: Once all this has settled down, and your new network is quite up and running, get your job to sponsor you an old 486 or something. Then try to set up FreeBSD (yes, even 3.0!) on it and PLAY with it for a month or two. If you have _any_ problems whatsoever, come right back to this list. If you still don't like working within the Unix paradigm, well, then at least you'll be able to say so from a position of strength. How's that for an idea? -- V Johann Visagie | wjv@CityIP.co.za | Tel: +27 21 419-7878 | ICQ: 20645559 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19981110122013.B1380>