From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Oct 26 18:35:45 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53E0616A4CE
	for <questions@freebsd.org>; Tue, 26 Oct 2004 18:35:45 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from imo-d04.mx.aol.com (imo-d04.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.36])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E651943D3F
	for <questions@freebsd.org>; Tue, 26 Oct 2004 18:35:44 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from TM4525@aol.com)
Received: from TM4525@aol.com
	by imo-d04.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v37_r3.8.) id v.e3.4beaba9 (3866);
	Tue, 26 Oct 2004 14:35:23 -0400 (EDT)
From: TM4525@aol.com
Message-ID: <e3.4beaba9.2eaff2eb@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 14:35:23 EDT
To: keramida@ceid.upatras.gr
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: 9.0 for Windows sub 5114
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.1
cc: questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Serious investigations into UNIX and Windows
X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: User questions <freebsd-questions.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions>,
	<mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions>,
	<mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 18:35:45 -0000

In a message dated 10/26/04 10:07:10 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
keramida@ceid.upatras.gr writes:

[much snippage]
>Nonsense, if you ask me.  For many reasons:
>
>a. Windows doesn't work nicely even for small networks most of the time.
>
>It's not the size of the network that matters.  It's the nature of the
>network.  Homogeneous, Windows-only networks will usually work somehow;
>not optimally, mind you, but they can be coerced into working.
>Heterogeneous networking environments, with many different types and
>versions of operating systems, are not so easy to use from Windows.

the same can be said of Cisco based networks. Everything works "better"
with products of the same make.  Even NFS between different un*x boxes
has issues.

Integration is what separates the men from the boys, so don't complain. 
If it were "easy" most of us would be doing something else.