Date: Fri, 06 Jun 1997 23:50:00 -0700 From: "Michael L. VanLoon -- HeadCandy.com" <michaelv@MindBender.serv.net> To: "Pedro F. Giffuni" <pgiffuni@fps.biblos.unal.edu.co> Cc: Jim Dixon <jdd@vbc.net>, freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: NT vs UNIX Message-ID: <199706070650.XAA01119@MindBender.serv.net> In-Reply-To: Your message of Fri, 06 Jun 97 10:31:46 -0700. <33984982.3723@fps.biblos.unal.edu.co>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>> They use an older version of Lotus Notes, which at that point of time
>> was more of a Unix app recompiled to run on NT than a server product
>> that was written to work comfortably and natively with the way NT
>> works. The 2-processor limit is just one example why (hint: the
>> threading and processor affinity should be totally transparent if the
>> software was written correctly for NT in the first place).
>This is a limitation of NT itself: while the UNIX sources are available
>for a price, NT's source code is one the best kept secrets. More than
>secret, they do whatever the want with it and don't tell anything to the
>major software developers (Lotus Notes) that could beat M$ products.
>It's fair to keep those limitations accounted for in a test.
I think you missed my point. I was simply talking about an app that
is written well for NT. An app that is written to be intelligently
multi-threaded, use the Win32 synchronization primitives, etc. Until
Notes 4, Lotus didn't try very hard to make the NT version of Notes
work well with NT.
However, the Exchange doesn't use any "private" APIs. Everything we
use is documented in MSDN (the Microsoft Developer's Network library).
In fact, in spite of the fact that I work _inside_ Microsoft, my
primary reference is still the publicly available MSDN library. The
only time I got to private specs or documentation is when we're
working with something that hasn't released yet.
>Remember that there's no way to make this type of tests with Exchange.
>IMHO, this is the problem with the "abridge and extend" policy of
>Mini$oft; they only extend if they own the API's.
>I'm sure after you did your part someone in M$ replaced some API's here
>and there until they were sure Exchange kicked out Notes. To be fair we
>would have to see a version for UNIX.
I hope you'll take this in the best possible way. :-) That is absurd
alarmist paranoid bullshit. Microsoft developers simply don't have
the time to pull stunts like that. If an external API was changed, it
was done so for purely technical reasons, of because of a bigger
picture (an ISV designed it for their product, but someone at MS saw a
way it could be used more generally for several products). In fact, I
had that happen to me. My boss took something I designed, and totally
mutated into something else. What I wrote was usable as an internal
library for a couple pieces of our product. What he turned it into
was a publicly consumable COM object, that anybody could script to.
>I agree that all tests can be slanted in some way or another, but the
>company that did this test is very serious. I haven't seen much tests
>around that were favorable to NT, would have to dig deeper in M$ web
>site, but the performance issue is dead around UNIX being faster but NT
>getting nearer and nearer.
There is a lot of very sincere marketing out there that contradicts
each other. :-)
[...]
>then I firmly believed MS Windows was a winner. Now I find a conceptual
>difficulty buying M$ products..(in fact I don't buy them :-) ).
>"Don't buy DR-DOS, we will soon release MS-DOS 6.0 that will offer lot's
>of new features that will become standard, besides DR-DOS won't run win
>3.1"
>"Don't buy OS2, we will release our 32-bit OS *VERY* soon and it will be
>very cool".
Sure, MS has pissed some people off in the past. I believe it's a
much more mature company than it was five or ten years ago. But
they're still very aggressive, and occasionally they may still pull a
stunt that pisses some people off. That's big business, I guess.
However, if there is any number one company using FUD (Fear, Uncertainty
and Doubt) as its primary weapon right now, it's Netscape. They want
desparately to compete with Microsoft in the back-end server business,
and are willing to spread as many rumors as possible until they can
eventually come out with server products as good as BackOffice (and
as good as Notes, to site another competitor). A Lotus CEO even
publicly roasted Netscape in an open letter to a trade rag recently,
because they are being so obnoxious.
And if it's simply big companies you hate, remember that IBM has
nearly ten times as many employees as Microsoft. :-)
>One of my previous employers ORDERED me to uninstall any UNIX box around
>and use exclusively NT. All my UNIX boxes survived; there were no
>official licenses for NT, and there isn't a version for IBM's Power
>processors. The same guy suggested we should remove all passwords from
>our boxes. Of course the day after I went away M$ found out we were
>using OS2 and made an additional discount on W95 licenses.
>My FBSD "development" box was erased with NT...when they want to go back
>to FreeBSD (they are already tired of licensing restrictions), they will
>have to pay a fee if the want to see FBSD reinstalled :).
Sucks to be them... :-)
>Just be honest with yourself and break the chains that tie you to Bill
>and his evil ways.
'Fraid those would be my paycheck and my stock options. Don't think
I'm willing to give those up just because some people object to
Microsoft marketing tactics. At least I don't work for Netscape. :-)
However, have comfort in the fact that I still love and fully support
the free BSDs. In fact, you'd be surprised to find out just how many
FreeBSD and NetBSD (and yes, even some Linux) enthusiasts there are in
the Exchange group.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael L. VanLoon michaelv@MindBender.serv.net
--< Free your mind and your machine -- NetBSD free un*x >--
NetBSD working ports: 386+PC, Mac 68k, Amiga, Atari 68k, HP300, Sun3,
Sun4/4c/4m, DEC MIPS, DEC Alpha, PC532, VAX, MVME68k, arm32...
NetBSD ports in progress: PICA, others...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199706070650.XAA01119>