On 09:13 PM 11/21/2001 +1000, Don Ingram wrote: >We vowed to stick with M$ to save having to deal with 'yet more different >software' but since our experience with dealing with Win2K server and M$'s >new direction in licensing we decided to have a look at Linux.
I think that readers may be confused by the difference between a server and workstation installation of an O/S. Regardless of which Linux or W2k is superior in the server market, since Protel EDA serves in an engineering workstation role. We are not in the server market, at least those of us who have any sense, since it would compromise optimized operation as an engineering workstation in either case. That is not to say that one cannot choose to operate an engineering client within a server, just that it is less than optimal to do so, and unless one is purposefully bargaining workstation performance for a dual-role as net-server, the user is not thinking clearly. As for performance in a workstation role, I would question any claim regarding superiority for Linux in running non-native programs. Since a interpretive porting client such as VMWare must be run to operate these non-native clients, valuable resources are consumed in operation of that porting client, and therefore effective performance of the client application (ex Protel) in question is almost inevitably reduced. There are only so many clock-cycles to work with. Perhaps a native Linux Protel client would run better, perhaps not, but without reducing resources to the windows version in favor of developing another O/S native version, one can't be sure, can one? The price to settle the dispute would be to reduce those support resources for the installed user-base of Windows versions of the Protel EDA suite, or perhaps use ATS to prop its L\native Linux actualization up. Either way, reduced resources for the installed base, and eventually added cost, at least in terms of effort if not monetary by the user to administer a secondary O/S to augment their installed base of Windows application for provision of this proposed "superior" Protel work environment. aj * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * To leave this list visit: * http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/leave.html * * Contact the list manager: * mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * Forum Guidelines Rules: * http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/forumrules.html * * Browse or Search previous postings: * http://www.mail-archive.com/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
