Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 28 Sep 2000 06:48:16 +0000 (GMT)
From:      Rick Hamell <hamellr@heorot.1nova.com>
To:        Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@ofug.org>
Cc:        freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Unix 2000...
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSF.4.21.0009280644560.37676-100000@heorot.1nova.com>
In-Reply-To: <xzp7l7v9wvi.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

> > I seem to understand that the process is far from completion. The
> > difficulties on the part of M$ clearly show that NT is decidedly not
> > the right tool for the job. If they are bent on wasting time (and
> > money) on this project, then so be it.
> 
> AFAIK, they're transitioning to Windows 2000, not NT.

	All through this class it's been; "This is what NT does wrong,
2000 does it better." Which then turns out to be a pseudo-Unix way of
doing it... :) The instructor is constantly rolling his eyes and
complaining about the legendary NT stability and is fond of telling
stories where NT didn't work, but by GOD 2000 did... :) Then I point out
that I know of companies who've been doing the same thing on Unix, with
less hardware for a long time. He also points out that you should have at
least 256 megs of RAM and 2, preferabbly 4 gigs of harddrive space for a
straight install! I started laughing at that point.....


						Rick



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?Pine.BSF.4.21.0009280644560.37676-100000>