Return to BSD News archive
Xref: sserve comp.sys.powerpc:30330 comp.sys.intel:26283 comp.os.misc:3560 comp.unix.bsd:15693 comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit:7856 comp.unix.sys5.r4:8895 comp.unix.misc:15207 comp.os.linux.development:21631 comp.os.linux.misc:32196 comp.os.linux.misc:32197 comp.os.386bsd.development:2880 comp.os.386bsd.misc:4517
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.mira.net.au!otis.apana.org.au!serval.net.wsu.edu!news.clark.edu!spool.mu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.cac.psu.edu!psuedvax.ed.psu.edu!KEN
From: ken@psuedvax.ed.psu.edu (Kenneth J. Hoover)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.powerpc,comp.sys.intel,comp.os.misc,comp.unix.bsd,comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit,comp.unix.sys5.r4,comp.unix.misc,comp.os.linux.development,comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.386bsd.development,comp.os.386bsd.misc
Subject: Re: Interested in PowerPC for Linux / FreeBSD / NetBSD?
Date: 20 Dec 1994 14:01:59 GMT
Organization: PSU College of Education
Lines: 167
Message-ID: <3d6o4n$k2q@hearst.cac.psu.edu>
References: <3cilp3$143@news-2.csn.net> <MICHAELV.94Dec19115633@MindBender.HeadCandy.com> <3d4o1h$7bh@galaxy.ucr.edu> <3d4ucp$sbn@hearst.cac.psu.edu>,<3d52i8$am5@galaxy.ucr.edu>
Reply-To: ken@psuedvax.ed.psu.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: psuedvax.ed.psu.edu
Boy did I pick the wrong group to post this to. Well, here goes. Be warned
this is kinda long.
In article <3d52i8$am5@galaxy.ucr.edu>, jjs@dostoevsky.ucr.edu (Joe Sloan) writes:
>In article <3d4ucp$sbn@hearst.cac.psu.edu>, I wrote:
>>In article <3d4o1h$7bh@galaxy.ucr.edu>, jjs@dostoevsky.ucr.edu (Joe Sloan)
>>writes:
>>>Windows NT is a joke! It is fine for simple folk who want to play
>>>solitaire, type their letters is MS Word, and run whatever the latest
>>>trendy MS applications happen to be,
>>
>> ...or who want a lightning-fast file-and-print-server OS that's not riddled
>>with security holes for bored CS students to hack in their spare time...
Okay, some ground rules. I'm talking about NT *SERVER* here when used AS A
SERVER. NT workstation is something I don't have direct experience with. So
let's begin.
>Oh, this is a scream! lightning fast? There is a saying here,
>"nothing slows down a computer like Windoze NT"
>and there is a reason for that...
Yeah. Features and stability, which I'll take over bugs and bombs any time
for a production environment. The job of a sys/net admin is to PREVENT that
phone from ringing. If done right, it hardly ever does.
>1. When you say "lightning fast", are you really talking about fast
> hardware, like a pentium 90 with 32 MB RAM?
We've found it to be pretty damn fast on 486's. Depends on what you're doing
with it. Read on.
>2. Benchmarks like the dhrystone test show Windoze NT running at roughly
> 1/3 the speed of UNIX on identical hardware
So? I don't run povray on my NT server because that's not what it's there
for. Benchmarks aren't everything, you know. Stability, reliability, and ease
of admin make up for lower benchmark rating in my book all the time. Need a
faster server? Buy an Alpha.
>3. We have a number of identical dual-boot pentiums with Windows NT 3.5
> "advanced server" and Linux - the comparison is hard to avoid; under
> linux I can rlogin, start a kernel recompile in the background, study
> the system logs, then rlogin into another machine and do something
> else, and come back to the kernel recompile when I get around to it.
Excuse me? Have you ever heard of "multitasking"? You must, since you run
unix. How about doing it the way all the windoze users in the world do --
start a program, ICONIFY IT, and go about your work. Start another program.
Telnet wherever you want, read your mail, defend an OS on usenet, and when
you feel like it double-click on your icon to see if you're done compiling
yet. That's not so hard, is it? and I don't even have to teach the user
anything they didn't know under Windoze.
Just because it doesn't let you type a lousy "&" to put something in the
background doesn't mean that it can't multitask. Would you be in trouble
if you had to type, say, a "%" instead of a "&" to put something in the
background under unix? I hope not. We're all accomplished computer people
here.
> - booting NT renders this same workstation deaf, dumb, and blind...
> none of the above is possible under NT "advanced server".
As I pointed out in my original post, NT is NOT DESIGNED to run in an all-un*x
environment, so "rlogin" is missing. BIG DEAL! It doesn't support rlogin or
NFS out of the box, (tho a free telnetd is available and NFS can be obtained
thru third-party companies), so OF COURSE it appears deaf, dumb and blind to
your un*x boxes which habla NFS and rlogin. It does, however, use LPD and let
you do things like print with it to LaserWriters without having to install
CAP on your unix boxes. However, all the Windows, Novell and LanMan users
suddenly had a server appear to THEM that's accessible not only via dumb LM
protocols like NetBIOS, but via IP and IPX.
>4. We have DEC Alphas that were delivered with Windows NT - after an
> evaluation period, NT was scrubbed in favor of OSF/UNIX, which runs
> circles around it...
In a un*x environment, you want un*x servers. Period. I have no problem
with that. How many Macs and Windoze machines are you serving?
NT 3.1? 3.1 was a 1.0 OS version. Try 3.5. And remember I'm talking
SERVERS here, not workstations. At least you're using Alpha boxes. 8-)
>5. Linux + samba will perform the same lanman server duties as NT,
> except that linux can also be simultaneously doing the following:
>
> 1. Run nfs server and/or nfs client
NT can serve to Macs, Win clients, and Novell clients out of the box with
practically no setup time. Who needs NFS when you don't got no unix boxes?
Probably everyone here has a un*x box, but I don't -- just 400 windoze and
Mac users who need a reliable, fast and easy-to-admin server platform.
NFS is available thru third-party suppliers to those who want to use an NT
server to serve unix boxes or PC's with PCNFSD, though I can't understand why
you'd want to.
> 2. Run a pcnfs server supporting multiple PCNFS logins
See above. I don't need NFS.
> 3. Support multiple UNIX user rlogins - totally impossible under NT
See #3 above. Get a freeware telnetd and log in to your hearts' content,
tho there isn't much to do there -- it's a server, dammit, why do you need to
log in to it? However, you can... and anyone else can join you as long as they
have accounts. Have you ever tried to hack an NT server? It's parctically
impossible. I got an alert just this morning about more root-access holes in
NFS... they come about every 6-8 weeks. Does NFS have that many holes? Of
course, it's un*x-based! The user is king and don't try to keep me from
accessing your confidential data because I have the right to see whatever's on
this system I please. Oh, brother.
> 4. Run simultaneous X servers and/or clients - totally impossible under NT
Bzzt. There are several providers of X for NT. Check your local software
place that doesn't also sell NES cartridges. Look for Linux software while
you're in there.
> And also, there are 2 other advantages to linux:
>
> 1. Linux is cost effective
You can't beat free... if you can handle the bugs, memory leaks and
incompatibilities. Is there a good SQL server for Linux? I'd really like to
know. How about software that supports a decent office e-mail package (not
POP) like cc:mail? Some of use rely on computers to keep our business running.
> 2. The Source code and docs are included
If you have time to go over the sources for your OS to find out why it
crashed while 400 people call you to tell you your server's down. And don't
tell me that Linux docs are either complete or easy for a non-unix person to
understand, because they aren't and they're not.
>I just typed these few examples off the top of my head, but a much
>larger and more comprehensive list is certainly possible!
I'm sure, since I'm obviously in the wrong by not bowing to the god of un*x to
fulfill all my needs. By the way, how long does it take to configure a Linux
box as a LM server if the computer's currently set up with Windoze like they
come from the manufacturer? Throw in a Mac file server, and LPD host? Can you
capture LaserWriters with it and serve them out to Windows boxes as print
queues without adding software to the client machines? For multiple servers?
In less then a month? It takes me about three hours to do all of the above,
and I don't need to maintain separate accounts on each machine for every user.
It's important to understand that different OS's work for different people.
I definitely picked the wrong place to disagree with someone's opinion that
Linux is better than NT for everything. I said, I believe, in my original post
that we use NT Server because WE DON'T GOT NO UN*X machines to serve, so
nothing is gained (other than lots of hard work and frustration) by bringing
one in.
So why do I read this group? (comp.os.linux.something) I like unix. I
really do.
I've run Linux. I liked it a lot and hope to run it again when I get
a platform that can handle it. However, as a (gag) "enterprise" server, it
doesn't cut it due to what a pain it would be to admin in a deployed form and
the bugs that it contains.
- Ken Hoover
--
Kenneth J. Hoover | "There is not one shred of evidence
ITSS Supervisor of Systems & Ops | that life is serious" - Joseph Campbell
Penn State College of Education | ken@psuedvax.ed.psu.edu -=*=- kjh6@psu.edu