This is a good point, provided that a well-known product exists and that
the previous staff chose to use the well-known product. Moreover, you may
be able to dissect the custom tool and figure it out. This option is
generally unavailable for proprietary systems.
-Tom
On Wed, 1 Nov 2000, DerekD. Martin wrote:
>
> In my experience, environments based on open standards are more likely to
> be customized by the people running the environment, because in general
> it's much easier to do so. A lot of administrative tasks are scripted on
> Unix machines, in order to automate them. Often on Windows (for example
> of a proprietary system), it's more difficult to do this, due to the
> closed nature of Windows and lack of built-in utilities. So you often
> will find that the administration staff has obtained some other (often
> well-known) product to do those tasks for them.
>
> In some ways, it's thought to be more beneficial, because the tool sets
> are the same. A new administrator in a Unix environment often has to
> learn tools which were custom-built by the admin staff, potentially making
> it harder to learn.
>
>
**********************************************************
To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] with the following text in the
*body* (*not* the subject line) of the letter:
unsubscribe gnhlug
**********************************************************
