>
> Date: Thu, 10 Jun 1999 12:43:33 -0700
> From: "Dave Gillett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: Why the move to NT?
>
> On 8 Jun 99, at 15:35, Wilbert Gwasera wrote:
>
> > Our organisation has been using UNIX as the O/S on our servers, now
> > because of the need to use packages like Visual Basic which offers
> > better GUi, they are also proposing that they replace all server OS
> > with NT.
>
> If your management believes "better GUI" is a desirable *server* feature,
> they're clueless.
So far, I have been just lurking, but I feel the need to add my $0.02. IMNSHO, the
*best* server is
one which does not need a keyboard OR MONITOR. I ran a multiple discipline network
(NetWare, Unix,
DecNet, IBM Lan Server on one ethernet wire) from systems which had at the most a
hercules graphics
card. Granted, for network statistics, load balancing, etc. graphics can be useful,
but that
function should (and in my situation was) handled by a network management workstation.
The time that
a (dedicated) server takes painting dancing paper clips on the screen is better
utilized for watching
network traffic, denying any and all packets which are prohibited, at the same time as
maximizing
throughput for allowed traffic. If management really wants to see tapes moving,
lights flashing,
etc. add a second machine (get out one of those 8088, 8086, or 80286's in the closet)
and dedicate it
to the _sizzle_.
Todd Bordeaux N7TWF
Process Engineering Group
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -or- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
I am the company - all opinions expressed are my company's
-
[To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe firewalls" in the body of the message.]
