Its all a matter of experience. If I had to manage a Novell network by myself it would take me a hell of a lot longer to test stuff and configure things than my NT/2k boxes.
Also, with Linux. I can guarantee my NT/2k boxes are much more secure that my Linux boxes. The reason is my level of experience. I have not spent enough time diving into Linux. I am a Linux hobbyist. Anyone that makes a blanket statement about TCO of any platform is a beer short of a six pack. It all comes down to experience and resources. ******************** Mike Carlson [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.domitianx.com Master Of The Spoon People Keeper Of None ******************** -----Original Message----- From: Shawn Connelly [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 6:19 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook blocked access to the following potentially unsafe - FOR THE LAST TIME! > Subject: RE: Outlook blocked access to the following potentially >unsafe >From: "Martin Blackstone" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2001 11:45:06 -0800 >Even allowing your mail system to pass .EXE and .COM files is a mistake. >You should thank MS for making OL block those types of files since you >don't. Huh?? So are implying that every other mail platform is dangerous because they allow .com and .exe files? Gee, I thought the real issue (read: problem) was the way Microsoft processed their 'special' files (e.g. asp, vb*). Thank Microsoft, you must be joking? Let's see, in a typical work: I spend about 3-6 hours research and testing (YES I really do test both in my test lab and on my workstation VMs) Microsoft's latest bug patches. For Linux, probably about 1-3 hours per week. For Netware 5, probably not much more than 1 hour per week. The point being, Microsoft can make it easier but all I see is supporting MS products is becoming more and more costly. [Unnecessary inflammatory comment warning] Anyone who claims the TCO is lower for MS NOS products as compared to Novell NOS (or any other NOS for that matter) understands little about non-MS NOS platforms! Okay, I'm done my rant! >-----Original Message----- [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >On Behalf Of Andy David >Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2001 11:41 AM >Subject: RE: Outlook blocked access to the following potentially unsafe >>>>>For such a typically minor patch? > Where did you get that idea? 8mb worth of changes.... Patches have been larger..... yeah, yeah, I know.... Size is not representative at all. Why are you nitpicking something so unimportant, forgedabowdid! >The Patch didnt break Outlook, your lack of preparation did. Over and >Out. For god's sakes, how many times must I repeat myself? I understood the consequences! My intent was to simply protest the method Microsoft used to 'correct' the problems with Outlook. I was really hoping to hear that fellow administrators also agreed with my observations. Damn, I did not expect a lynch mob! I'm beginning to think this is a discussion group for a Microsoft cult. (ha! - now take it easy, that means joke okay?) I'll tell y'all what, from now on I'll wear my dunce cap and promise never to speak ill of Microsoft ever again. BTW, I wish some of you folks would edit your responses (delete the unnecessary text) before pressing the send button. Have a nice day everyone! _________________________________________________________________ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _________________________________________________________________ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
