Re: OpenQM vs. Everything Else


Tony Gravagno wrote:
"dawn" wrote:
The question from my
perspective is whether there is a reason to switch to MS on the server.
I know you haven't spent your entire career in a Windows server
environment, but it sounds like the majority of those you work with are
there now. Although many have replaced Novell with Windows NT and
following, I have not seen a huge rush to shed all flavors of unix from
shops. If I were the one with the budget for a large shop now, I would
not suggest they run out and switch their production *nix environment
to Windows, would you?

Dawn, I never recommend replacement when it comes to operating
systems, only augmentation with the right tools for the job. Few of
my clients are in fact running a Windows Server under their DBMS, but
most of them have a Windows box that they can run stuff on. If it's
easier to do something with Linux, keep it there but I find there are
lot of tools that aren't available there yet. Whether you're on
Windows or Linux, if there is a function that can best be performed on
the other box then pass data to the other box which serves as nothing
more than an appliance.

I don't care what system people use, I'll point out the flaws and
merits of all platforms.

I have that same personality trait. It is easy to say that it depends
on the specific requirements in any given situation, so that's what
I'll do even though I'll add that it is likely that one of these two
solutions (*nix or Windows as a server platform) is likely less
expensive in actual budget dollars for a company than the other. I
don't know which is, but I have an intuition about it that might differ
from your intuition on the same question.

I'm here to exchange information, not
religious dogma.

I hope you are talking about someone else (that Tom guy, perhaps),
since I spend all my dogma in other areas. (By the way, have you and
Tom ever met in person? I'm planning to chat with him in person at
the end of next week, so then I will have met both of you. Then
conversations like this one will be even more entertaining for me, I'm
guessing -- those women who watch soap operas don't know what they are
missing ;-)

I have noted for many years that when people say
they want to do X, that Microsoft seems to have a lot of the answers
and Linux does not - that's not my fault.

That isn't your fault, but that IS your *spin*. I like the fact that
Microsoft provides one-stop shopping. Just like Apple with the old
Mac-OS, the monopoly approach also has some downsides, often
translating into real dolalrs. We both agree there are pros and cons of
various solutions, even if we might weight them differently in any
particular situation.

Unfortunately when one
mentions the flaws of Linux these days it's considered sacrilege,

Not to me. I have made a little noise about the fact, FACT, (OK, my
opinion) that linux is a boy's world. Women in computing ignore it or
delegate it, but few of us care to install and tend to it for our
desktop OS. You aren't going to make enough of a dent on the desktop
when one entire gender of IT professionals (not to mention end-users)
ignores you (I hope). I haven't quite captured the reasons for this,
but one has to do with the fact that if I get a computer from Best Buy,
it isn't running linux, and, if it were, my Adobe products woudn't
work.

and
mentioning the merits of Windows is interpreted as a sales pitch or
fanaticism.

Not by me.

I guess my big mistake is playing into the trolls.

I'll again assume you don't mean me, 'cause I really don't take kindly
to being called a troll.

Funny
thing is I'm very middle of the road on all of these things despite
how I'm pegged to be so biased.

I believe you.

If you want a real argument, let's
talk politics or religion. ;)

What do you think of Calvinism? People think Calvinists are fanatics
too, but they tend to be pretty middle-of-the-road. smiles. --dawn

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Future of IT in Lebanon
    ... It's the same Linux code base. ... Microsoft Office on a Windows server, it will install and run fine, the main ...
    (soc.culture.lebanon)
  • Re: Question about Red Hat Linux Enterprise
    ... we have is running Windows 2000 Server ... Luckily running Apache + MySQL on a Linux system is not a lot ... MySQL database and injecting it back into the MySQL installation ...
    (comp.os.linux.networking)
  • Re: Sweet Success
    ... Let's continue to assume that I prefer Windows to anything else: ... neither Linux nor Windows may be the answer. ... While it may well be initially less expensive to install a Linux-based ... of Linux simultaneously, along with Windows Server, AIX, and OS/400. ...
    (RedHat)
  • Re: [Full-disclosure] 70 million computers are using Windows 98 right now
    ... Linux is definitely not a natural migration pathway. ... Windows 2000, Windows XP, and Mac OS X seem to work pretty ... > desktop to server. ... But then the persons across the sea just can't install ...
    (Full-Disclosure)
  • Re: Benutzerkontenverwaltung mit Win 2003 Server - Teil 2
    ... und dann bin ich über Solaris zur ersten 30-Disketten-Version Linux ... Server auch keine grafische Oberfläche, der vi ist halt mein bester ... Und das ganze geht schon in Ansätzen seit Windows NT so ... > Unternehmensnetzwerk unter Unix administrieren könnte. ...
    (microsoft.public.de.german.windows.server.networking)