I believe, "troubles with five dedicated NT" are because most of Unix
machines is standing in separate room, where no one can touch it under fear
of death, while NT used as workstations (at least) and Quake servers.
When user asks about bad performance with NT, answer is "BG must die" contra
"UX is busy server, so just wait".
Thousands $ easily spend on SCSI instead of additional 10$ for good IDE.
> I almost believe that non-intel unix box is always the most cost
> effective solution. :-) My experiences told me that one unix box even
> shared with five applications gave less troubles than five dedicated
> NTs.
Received on Tue Jan 15 2002 - 06:59:34 CST
