>NT *is* scalable and robust. If anyone is having a problem with the logic of the
>site, it's the programming (which is my fault). If anyone is having difficulty
>accessing us, it's the bandwidth (there have been a lot of internet problems
>lately).
Having sat at an NT 4.0 patch level 3 workstation for the last six months, I have to take issue with the statement that NT is robust. My system gives me a blue screen about once every three - four weeks. On top of that, I have to reboot the thing every time I install a new application. To install the new version of Communicator today, I had to reboot after removing the previous version and then reboot after installing the new version. Give me a break. NT's implementation of shared dynamic libraries is a cludge, it's memory management implementation is slow and it's file layout algorithm is poor. To add injury to insult, it forces me to use one of the stupidest UI's known to mankind (only superceeded by the one on Windows 3.1).
The Solaris based Sun I used for three years before I switched jobs never crashed due to software problems and I could install hardware drivers into the system without rebooting, much less applications. Face it Brad, NT is a bad operating system foisted on us by a good marketing department. It may work for you, but it is nowhere near the same class as Solaris.
Sid Stuart, ex UNIX Systems manager |
