I have actually refrained from commenting on any of this but feel that I
must back the people who argue for a sense of balance and impartiality. I
work with NT and find many frustrations with the product. Many of the
issues I have are because I grew up in the mainframe world and dislike the
need to reboot for changes. Another one of the major problems I have is
the fact that application of service packs will reload programs you have
consciously decided to remove.
However, even with all of this I think NT is like any other product out
there, once you understand it you can make it work for you. Ths major
problem with NT is its very popularity. I contracted for many years and
was generally called in to fix up other peoples errors. This gave me a
very cynical attitude about what passes for "IT skills" in the market
place. NT's very market share causes it to be a target for so called
experts as there are many bucks to made.
In many companies people are more complimentary about incompetent technical
support, "They were always here at my desk fixing things every time I had a
problem", and scathing about good technical support, "We never see you IT
guys, what do you do all day?".
Remember that anyone can install an operating system but it takes skill to
do it well.
NT, when setup correctly, is a reliable desktop and server environment.
While it may lack many of the tools that exist in the Unix and Mainframe
world these are being produced by third party suppliers at a great rate of
knots. Management of NT using standard tools is often hard work but third
party add ons simplify this. The arguement for ease of use with NW/NDS
should be counter balanced by looking at products like Enterprise
Administrator, which has a lower per seat cost.
I think this list is excellent as an information resource and the majority
of the posts are very intelligent. I made use of this myself not so long
ago with a question on encryption options for Novell and received many good
replies (thanks to every-one who responded). It is sad when the list gets
clogged by "religious wars". As with most "religious" arguments, there can
never be any winner as the The Faith allows no compromise.
I have no doubt that this post will cause hackles to rise and I can already
feel the heat of the flames, but hopefully it may cause people to stop and
ponder for a moment or two.
Kafil.
"Paul D. Robertson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 03/06/99 05:43:21
To: Brian Steele <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Why not NT?
On Wed, 2 Jun 1999, Brian Steele wrote:
> What's so funny about this whole thread is these guys ranting and raving
> about NT being not suitable for Firewall work, but many companies are
> happily, and successfully, employing NT Firewalls anyway.
So, rather than disputing the technical points "it's popular so it must
be good" is your argument? Maybe people are happily living in trailer
parks, that doesn't make them the ideal structure to reside in during
tornado season.
> Perhaps what they should really be asking is what do those companies know
> about employing an NT-based system that they don't.
Why? Because it's popular? I've got high-assurance solutions that work,
what sound technical reason do you have for going to a lower-assurance
solution?
Security isn't about popularity contests.
Paul
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
Paul D. Robertson "My statements in this message are personal opinions
[EMAIL PROTECTED] which may have no basis whatsoever in fact."
PSB#9280
-
[To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe firewalls" in the body of the message.]
-
[To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe firewalls" in the body of the message.]
