Agreed. We have three AIX servers in our studio--out of over 1000 servers and workstations--and those are our TSM servers.
Granted, we are a Unix shop, but as most non-AIX Unix admins will tell you, AIX can be a very different beast. Nevertheless, the amount of adminstrative work we have had to do on these boxes over the past five years (yes, *five* years) has been negligible. To bring in another thread, we are moving our TSM servers to Linux, but not as a result of a disappointment with AIX, simply keeping in line with corporate strategy. -- Tom Thomas A. La Porte, Dreamworks SKG <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> On Thu, 12 Jun 2003, Dan Goodman wrote: >Mark Cini wrote: > > > ... >> We haven't purchased any hardware yet for TSM, as management wants to be >> sure we pick the right combination. I am leaning towards TSM server >> running on Win2000 because of our current in-house expertise. >> >> We are excited about the capabilities of TSM combined with an estimated >> $100k savings over the next year in hardware replacement costs alone. > >Have you considered that perhaps the reason you have more inhouse Win2k >expertise is because Win2k requires more support expertise? > >Don't forget to factor in the Win2k support costs, and be sure to get >actuals from other users, not just published whitepapers. > >A word to the wise... > >AIX is a scalable, reliable workhorse, and is the native platform for >TSM. These are not things that should not be overlooked, IMHO. > >Dan Goodman >Systems Engineer Specialist >Thomas Jefferson University Hospital >215-503-6808 > ><Daniel.Goodman AT mail.tju.edu> > >