From owner-freebsd-chat Sun Aug 24 13:43:34 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id NAA20325 for chat-outgoing; Sun, 24 Aug 1997 13:43:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from x173-171.reshalls.umn.edu (x173-171.reshalls.umn.edu [160.94.173.171]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA20311 for ; Sun, 24 Aug 1997 13:43:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by x173-171.reshalls.umn.edu (8.8.5/8.6.9) with SMTP id PAA01693; Sun, 24 Aug 1997 15:44:24 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: <199708242044.PAA01693@x173-171.reshalls.umn.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: x173-171.reshalls.umn.edu: localhost [127.0.0.1] didn't use HELO protocol From: mikk0022@maroon.tc.umn.edu To: Peter Korsten , freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Rumors of the death of Unix have been greatly exaggerated... In-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 24 Aug 1997 20:22:23 +0200." <19970824202223.49716@grendel.IAEhv.nl> Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 15:44:24 -0500 Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > > J Wunsch shared with us: > > As Bill Pechter wrote: > > > > > Lucent and AT&T have moved > > > their desktops and a number of pieces of development to NT boxes. (Price > > > drives all decisions in the free market.) > > > > Apparently not. If this were the case, we'd have many more FreeBSD > > and Linux installations. So it very apparently drives not *all* > > decisions. > > Except when the party involved wants official support, like about > all mayor corporations. Which isn't cheap for /any/ operating system. And it exists for FreeBSD. (well, they have a sizeable 'consultants' page, anyway). Also, with FreeBSD, UNIX shops wouldn't incur the extra cost of re-training, re-hiring, and/or/ running with inexperienced staff during re-training/hiring. NT is not ready for prime-time, and the shop would still need a UNIX server or two (even Microsoft did). Then you have the extra cost/hassle of maintaining a heterogeneous network (ouch). -Chris