Oracle FAQ Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid
HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US
 

Home -> Community -> Mailing Lists -> Oracle-L -> Re: Solaris vs Windows 2000

Re: Solaris vs Windows 2000

From: Lyndon Tiu <ltiu_at_alumni.sfu.ca>
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2002 19:34:45 -0800
Message-ID: <F001.0050088B.20021111193445@fatcity.com>


Seriously now.

I know you are trying to evaluate Solaris and Windows, but ...

Linux is the way to go. Sun's are expensive machines.

NT/2K are cheap(er) but locks you into an expensive software upgrade cycle.

Linux costs very little and runs on cheap hardware.

--
Lyndon Tiu

On Monday 11 November 2002 06:58 pm, Stephen Lee wrote:

> -----Original Message-----
> Now that that's out of the way, what I am trying to do is find
> objective material comparing the use of MS Windows 2000
> Server on Intel HW to Solaris on Sun HW.
> ------------------------------------------------
>
> My personal bias against Windows is based mostly on three things.
>
> 1. Incompatibility with everything else. Microsoft makes its products as
> incompatible as it can get away with so that once you start going down the
> Microsoft path, you become more and more locked into that path.
>
> 2. It is a single-user operating system. Microsoft has done a pretty good
> job of making it look otherwise by tacking on some multi-user extensions;
> but it is, in fact, NOT a multi-user OS. Just try creating a general user
> so that user can install, upgrade, and maintain their application without
> having administrator privilege. It ain't gonna happen. And that brings up
> the main problem with this arrangement: Every user that must support an
> application on the box must have administrator privilege. This, of course,
> presents a completely insecure environment.
>
> 3. In its "normal" form, there is an amazing lack of the kind of support
> and scripting utilities the are normal on Unix. True, if one wants to
> spend the time, many of the utilities can be set up on NT; but that
> involves additional setup and maintenance time -- which your NT admins
> might not be inclined to do if the bureaucracy of your organization
> requires that they do it. If your scripting abilities are substantial,
> then you, no doubt, automate many things with scripts. If you have built
> these scripts with a non-standard environment, then you have built your
> house on shifting sand. (By the way, this is why I do not fully support
> Linux.)
>
> I must agree that I do like the Dell Poweredge stuff. I was using it years
> ago, and the value is certainly compelling. It's too bad that Sun did the
> same thing with Solaris on Intel that IBM did to OS/2 (got very stuck up
> about it and over-priced the crap out of everything until it was too late).
> But the Sun hardware (and IBM too) ain't all that shabby either. And my
> past experience -- when I was a sys admin work -- with Sun customer support
> was very positive. IBM .... eh, so-so ... maybe.
>
> Perhaps another thing to consider: If you have ever tried to upgrade the OS
> on a NT box supporting third-party applications, I suspect you discovered
> that it can be an excrutiatingly painful experience ... If you even
> succeeded at all.
-- Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com -- Author: Lyndon Tiu INET: ltiu_at_alumni.sfu.ca Fat City Network Services -- 858-538-5051 http://www.fatcity.com San Diego, California -- Mailing list and web hosting services --------------------------------------------------------------------- To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message to: ListGuru_at_fatcity.com (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L (or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from). You may also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).
Received on Mon Nov 11 2002 - 21:34:45 CST

Original text of this message

HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US