Toymods Car Club Inc: The Outhouse => Want to rip microsoft off? Legally!

Toymods Car Club
www.toymods.org.au

F.A.Q.

Home

Members

Toymods » The Outhouse » Want to rip microsoft off? Legally! () 1 Vote(s) Show: Today's Posts :: Show Polls Email to friend

Author

Topic

Nark
Forums Junkie

Location:
Cabramatta, NSW
Registered:
May 2002

Re: Want to rip microsoft off? Legally!

Fri, 08 October 2004 05:00

Norbie wrote on Fri, 08 October 2004 12:56

Quote:

It is [b]not[\b] a reliable OS because Micro$haft's QA is virtually non-existant.

And you know this how? Let me guess, you read it on a pro-Linux propaganda site. Smile

I know this because I use their shithouse buggy OS every day. Razz

Norbie wrote on Fri, 08 October 2004 12:56

I was simply pointing out that a properly setup and maintained Windows environment can be rock-solid and stable, even when placed under extreme load for extended periods. Like any tool, a computer is only as good as the person using it!

Believe it or not, I have actually seen rock-solid Windows servers. But the amount of maintenence required to keep them rock-solid differs vastly from Unix boxes.

Norbie wrote on Fri, 08 October 2004 12:56

Quote:

I don't think that's an industry norm for Windoze boxes.
Granted, the typical Windoze admin doesn't even need to know how to type let alone keep a system humming properly...

More Linux-geek propaganda with no foundation in reality. Show me any large enterprise that considers frequent reboots of critical systems acceptable. Show me any large enterprise who employs admins who don't know how to keep their critical systems running. Seriously, where do you get these ideas from?

I've seen CSIRO and ATO admins at work.
"What? Something's wrong?"
<loads up admin console>
<looks through menu options>
"Perhaps it's this"
"Or maybe this"
*click* *click* *click*

Norbie wrote on Fri, 08 October 2004 12:56

I used to work for Qld Health and at least 50% of their critical systems ran on Windows servers, and when I say critical I mean they have a direct impact on patient care. If a server has 10 minutes of unscheduled downtime, even at 3am on a Saturday night, heads roll the following morning. If Windows was anywhere near as unreliable as you seem to think, it would never be used in the enterprise! Strangely enough though, Windows is going from strength to strength in the enterprise.

If you've worked in large enterprises, then you should know that it's not always (actually, it's rarely) the best offering that gets chosen. There are a myriad of political issues which invariably affect every purchase decision, from existing relationships with a vendor, to someone up high pointing a magic stick at the winner of a bid, to the existing infrastructure which will favour one over another.
A [b]huge]/b] reason why Windows servers are chosen over Unix is the cost of Unix admins.
The difference of course (which you somehow seem to disagree with) is that 99% Windows admins are morons who don't even keep up to date with security patches.
Do you remember how many high profile companies were affected by Blaster? These were large enterprises, and all had Windows admins who didn't apply a 9 month old patch to their critical systems.

Norbie wrote on Fri, 08 October 2004 12:56

Quote:

And how often do the Windows systems need to have patches applied compared to a Unix system? Kinda makes up for the expense of Unix admins methinks!

Youthinks, based on what? Have you read any TCO studies lately?

Yes. Many. I can even point to you a bunch.
But I do tend to ignore TCO studies done by companies owned by MS...

And seriously, most are biased toward one side or the other. So much of it is subjective, and doesn't take into consideration the existing infrastructure and skillset that a certain company might have.

Norbie wrote on Fri, 08 October 2004 12:56

Quote:

Plus, as I stated earlier, the vast majority of Windows admins know shit (which greatly contributes to Windows's reputation as being unreliable).

Typical of the arrogant nonsense I hear from unix zealots. Not surprisingly you never hear this sort of thing from people who have actual experience in the field, so it's safely ignored. Smile

Read my stuff on Blaster.

The average Windows admin is of a level well below that of a Unix admin. Mainly because it doesn't take much effort to be able to say that you can admin a Windows box. *click* *click*

When Windows can make its servers run without a GUI, then I may consider that they're serious about writing a server OS.
Until the, who knows how much "desktop shit" is still in Windows.

[Report message to a moderator]

[Message index]

-=] Back to Top [=-

Current Time: Tue Jul 22 18:05:17 UTC 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.0056180953979492 seconds

.:: Contact :: Home ::.