Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2000 11:24:50 -0800 From: Joseph Scott <joseph.scott@owp.csus.edu> To: Jonathon McKitrick <jcm@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org> Cc: Kris Kennaway <kris@hub.freebsd.org>, freebsd-chat <chat@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: any news on w2k in the world? Message-ID: <38BEC002.5AD7CE8@owp.csus.edu> References: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0003021850270.93707-100000@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Jonathon McKitrick wrote: > > Setting security aside for the moment, what about other issues? > Overall stability, speed, hardware support, administration, > scalability, etc. Given that the product hasn't been out for the general public for a month yet it's probably a bit overboard to closely examine how well it will do. Let's put it this way, FreeBSD 4.0 gets released on say 10 March, at the rate we are going we would know all there is know about the impact of 4.0 by 2 April. Not very realistic. Back to your question though. Admin : windows needs good scripting ability, NT 4 definitely didn't have it. Does 2000? Don't know. Case in point : try adding 500 windows accounts, point and click all over. In the unix world you'd just script the creation go to town. Speed : MS has never been known to concern itself over running well on minimal resources. I'm sure you can make 2000 run fast, but it will take more hardware to do it. If that's not the case then it will likely be a first for MS. This goes along the same lines with scalability. > I am concerned about all this because i *just* got into Unix, and i > hoped pursuing a job in the field isn't a waste of time. Now M$ > appears with a 'Unix-slayer' OS, at least in their minds, and they put If you step in to the way back machine you'll discover that NT 3.51 was also listed as THE unix slayer. Never happened, at least from where I'm sitting :-) > enough time into development and testing to raise a few eyebrows. And > unlike previous releases, this one is really getting good reviews. Once again, get into the way back machine. Windows tends to get large amounts of good and bad reviews. Depends on what the focus of the review is. One OS can not be the best at everything, the concept of having priorities makes that pretty much impossible. This is of course true for BSD/Unix also. There are trade offs, people have to decide which trade offs they are willing to live with and which ones they are not. > I just heard from someone recently about several banks that switched > to NT from Unix. I thought banks would stick to the most robust > systems. Apparently i was wrong. My guess is you will continue to hear some of these stories. Just as you will continue to hear stories about shops moving from Windows to BSD/Linux/Unix. I'm sure there are banks that switched to NT 4 not too long after it came out also. Does that make their decision a good one? Maybe, maybe not. Goes back to trade offs. -- Joseph Scott joseph.scott@owp.csus.edu Office Of Water Programs - CSU Sacramento To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?38BEC002.5AD7CE8>