ack.
>
> Unix/Linux isn't like that...
ack too
[snip]
> > +> > machines have an
> > +> > uptime of far more than 280 days!!!!! (one is over 290 !)
> > +> > Can anybody please show me *any* NT-User-WS with such uptime?
> > +> okay now you are dreaming...
no really :-)
I don't wanna start here another-*nix-vs-nt-religious-war just telling of
my eperience.
I use NT since 3.1 Advanced Server (which was installed from diskettes
:o|) and I can tell that M$ is doin' anything to make their monolithic
kernel reliable (or MORE reliable).
We're running mission critical ERP applications on NT and our productive
machine was last rebooted in February, so because there's no 'uptime'
utility, I don't know the exact dates. Our logbook shows last reboot entry
in Feb. From the WORKSTATION point of view I should tell that NT is
bloatware for most our users. They don't need all these colourized icons
flying arround to do their work, they're only doin' some letters in Word
and some Excel sheets, and a gui for the ERP app, not more. So everything
beyond is unnecessary.
> > I'm sitting here with my real life experience and I'm still awaiting
> > M$ to come even a tiny bit closer to what I call a stable (which I call
> > *PROFESSIONAL*) system. - They don't get it. They haven't got it for years
> > now. - Even Linux was completely developed during the time M$ exists, so
> > M$ has a major advantage over Linux in this case. - Is NT more stable? - No.
> > Has it more features? - No. - Is it cheaper? - No. - Does it perform better?
> > - In most cases: No.
I agree.
> > So why should I use NT?
...because without at least ONE M$ station in your company you will not be
able to read all these little word documents, that come through your
e-mail, these excel sheets, that're exchanged. M$ is the quasi standard,
although it's as proprietary as it can be. (although there is very good
work from stardivision p. ex., the import filters are excellent)
> > Neutral analysts believe that NT contains 2.3 million bugs. *GULP*
> > And now comes Windows 2000 (aka NT 5.0) - guess how many bugs...
M$ is not able to handle their own products, because they simply cannot
handle all the dependencies because of the monolithic style of the kernel
and the gui integrated.
> > The analysts guess it will be around 5 million bugs.
I guess so too... :-)
We're goin' into pilot in January 2000 to switch our ERP to Linux, let's
see if it can handle such loads :-)
-- Markus Doehr IT Admin AUBI Baubeschlaege GmbH Tel.: +49 6503 917 152 Fax : +49 6503 917 190 doehrm@aubi.de
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/