Rich,
I'll start this one off by telling you that I ran a small ISP with a couple of
Linux boxes, a xylogics box handling dial-up, and an NT server handling Cold
Fusion. While the Linux box was essentially configured when I got it, I set up
the various servers and ran the system. Yes, I do know a little bit about Linux
and unix. I'll even grant that unix is a better web server for many
applications. I still maintain that ColdFusion and Access are a nice team and
that currently are only supported under NT (though Solaris and FoxPro is an
option).
> Again, *only* 50K records? Why even bother with a database? It's just
> not worth it. Sheesh, if just loading the data brings the system to
> its knees, that oughta be a pretty big indicator that something about
> the approach isn't right.
I'm loading the database. The database will have over 500,000 bibliographic
records with multiple repeatable fields, a multi-lingual thesaurus, and a level of
complexity that would take too long to describe here. The base software we are
using is the library package from Cuadra (http://www.cuadra.com/ ) called STAR.
> It's a myth that NT is easier for non-techies. I've watched "certified"
> NT "experts" tear their hair out trying to do things that garden-variety
> Unix/Linux systems do out-of-the-box.
There are techies and there are techies. I've seen highly paid techies who know
less than I do trying to pass themselves off as professionals. I've also seen
some people try to make a square peg fit a round whole when stepping back and
rethinking the problem would have been a better solution.
> It is always possible -- if one must -- to refer to the exact
> code that implements a particular function or program. That's
> the authoritative and final information on how it works.
And this is likely the biggest plus and minus to unix. If you are someone who
really likes to get your hands dirty with this level of code, the lack of this
ability in NT would drive you mad. On the other hand, I don't want to be
recompiling the operating system. I just want to install a piece of software,
configure it, and be done with it.
> Contrast with NT where no source code is available and the
> entire system is a black box, often with missing or incorrect
> documentation.
There is third party documentation for NT which is quite good, as there is third
party documentation for unix which is quite good. There are also a number of
resources available free on the internet for both, so I see neither advantage or
disadvantage to documentation levels.
> Does dealing with the OS at the source code level take expertise?
> Sure -- not as much as those brainwashed by Microsoft would
> have you believe, but it does involve a learning curve. However,
I'm still figuring out Solaris (think I liked Linux better), but yes it can be
learned. As I mentioned above I managed to teach myself enough to run an ISP but
it was a pretty steep learning curve (thank god for ORA) and I still wasn't
comfortable installing patches and new versions of the operating system without
backup around.
> at least it's *possible*, as opposed to the NT world, where
> it's impossible and likely to stay that way. (You don't think
> Microsoft would be so stupid as to actually publish that hairball,
> do you?)
No, but I can just wait for the next patch and just apply that. Yes they are
behind, and yes I can't just muck around with it myself, but I generally don't
have time for that BS anyhow. If it's not broken enough to cause me grief, I've
got at least 50 other things that need to be done.
> a fully standards-compliant manner. When you finish installing NT,
> you aren't even close to that -- you've now got to install the
> layers of applications that you actually need. *And*, thanks to
> some fundamental design errors in NT, you have to work hard to
> keep those applications from stepping all over each other (config files
> and the like). And once you get past *that*, now you have to deal with
> the very poor resource management in NT which makes it difficult for
> all of these applications to co-execute efficiently.
This I don't understand. I can take a brand new system and have it up and running
with web server, ftp server, sendmail, dns, Cold Fusion and whatever else I need,
on NT with the latest service packs in about 4-5 hours. I don't have to worry
about apps stepping on each other, and they aren't fighting each other.
> spend it learning the OS that built the Internet and that will
> be with us well into the future, instead of one that represents
> a recycling of the bad ideas from Windows, VMS, and other failures.
Until ColdFusion will run on a Linux box with an Access database, I'll be running
NT servers. There is already a large front of developers pushing for this, so
hopefully it will happen at some point.
As for network servers, I still prefer NT over unix for most small to mid-sized
businesses, but perhaps as unix comes more out of the techie domain into one that
can be administered by relatively non-techies and more business software is
available for it, it will become a more viable alternative to MS.
--
Making the Web Work for You (tm)
Susan Duncan ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Voice: (613) 744-3283
Director, Internet Development Fax: (613) 744-1825
http://www.malico.com Toll Free: (877) WEB-PROS
http://www.OttawaWEB.COM
MALICO - Graphic Design and Internet Development
Founders: Ottawa-Hull Chapter-Int'l Webmasters Association
____________________________________________________________________
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Join The Web Consultants Association : Register on our web site Now
Web Consultants Web Site : http://just4u.com/webconsultants
If you lose the instructions All subscription/unsubscribing can be done
directly from our website for all our lists.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
