Re: NT server, pro/con

shf@world.std.com (Stephen H Fick) wrote: >While working on an assignment to choose a database product, >I've just been asked to look into using an NT server >rather than a Sun Solaris 2.x server. > >I'm interested in hearing people's evaluation of the merits >and demerits of an NT server in a server/client RDB >environment. Speed, reliability, security, expandability, >ease of learning the system administration work, ease of >performing it--talking here about the NT side of things, >not the RDB side--are obvious areas of concern. Are there >others? How does NT stack up, to date? > >As you may have deduced, I have plenty of Unix experience, >none with NT. > >Will be glad to post a summary, or to forward to individual >responders. > >Tia, >Steve NT Server v3.5 is simply, in my experience (PC network solutions only) the _best_ netork operating system currently available. It is _very_ easy to administer, unlike the only other real heavyweight contender - NetWare 4.1. It is as reliable as they come. I have had _zero_ server crashes on a minimally configured system. I have had several apps lockup (because of my stupidity - every one of them), but that has never lock up the whole system. On the other hand, NetWare 4.x (prior to 4.1) has given me consistent lockups. I am still awaiting my promised copy of 4.1, so things may get rosier on that side (I hope!). Alas, I have never had oportunity to use an NT Server as a database server, so I dunno how it would perform in comparison to some other solutions... ================================================================== Andrew Fittro Computer Consultant ARK Systems Software (408) 986-1850 -or- (415) 328-2533 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ InterNet Email Address: afittro@perpetual.com World Wide Web Home Page: http://www.perpetual.com/ Anonymous FTP: ftp.best.com/pub/afittro