> In the month or two I've been on this list (ditto when I was monitoring some
> comp.os.linux.* groups), I have yet to see (so far as I can recall) any
> comparisons of Linux to Netware. So if you're reasonably familiar with both:
> how do the two compare? Does Netware have any strong points in comparison to
> Linux? Is it universally inferior (and if so, why)? Is it universally
> better?
>
> Why doesn't anyone grump about Netware the way they do about NT?
The purpose of an OS (or NOS) as well as that of a computer (or network of
computers) is to get useful work done. This generally means using application
software. Thus, the order of importance begins with the job requirements, not
with the OS. NetWare allows the users to run a vast variety of applications. If
the client-server paradigm and this array of software are suitable, as is the
case in a great many installations, then that is the optimal architecture.
As for your last point, it has been our observation and experience (limited as
they may be) that NetWare is largely bullet-proof. We have been running a small
v3.12 network for many years. It is essentially invisible. It always works, it's
always there (assuming that the UPS is plugged in), and it just does not
interfere with the use of the software which does the real work.
Nothing is universally better or worse. Fanatics and enthusiasts often fail to
realize this. You use the best tool for the job, and remember that the job comes
first - not the tool.
Unless, of course, you are using the OS for entertainment at home, in which
event NetWare has little to offer!
--
David Fisher
Chief Engineer
Fisher Research Corporation
Rochester, New York
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
716 328 4230
fax 328 1984
--
PLEASE read the Red Hat FAQ, Tips, Errata and the MAILING LIST ARCHIVES!
http://www.redhat.com/RedHat-FAQ /RedHat-Errata /RedHat-Tips /mailing-lists
To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe" as the Subject.
