Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 22:36:47 +0300 From: Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@ceid.upatras.gr> To: TM4525@aol.com Cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Serious investigations into UNIX and Windows Message-ID: <20041026193647.GB40173@gothmog.gr> In-Reply-To: <e3.4beaba9.2eaff2eb@aol.com> References: <e3.4beaba9.2eaff2eb@aol.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 2004-10-26 14:35, TM4525@aol.com wrote: >In a message dated 10/26/04 10:07:10 AM Eastern Daylight Time, >keramida@ceid.upatras.gr writes: >> Nonsense, if you ask me. For many reasons: >> >> a. Windows doesn't work nicely even for small networks most of the time. >> It's not the size of the network that matters. It's the nature of the >> network. Homogeneous, Windows-only networks will usually work somehow; >> not optimally, mind you, but they can be coerced into working. >> Heterogeneous networking environments, with many different types and >> versions of operating systems, are not so easy to use from Windows. > > the same can be said of Cisco based networks. Everything works "better" > with products of the same make. Even NFS between different un*x boxes has > issues. The fact that Cisco does something wrong doesn't somehow make it right for Windows. It's not a good excuse either. > Integration is what separates the men from the boys, so don't complain. > If it were "easy" most of us would be doing something else. I don't see you supporting UNIX because "it's harder to use, so it must be what 'real men' use". Probably because this sort of argument is pointless.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20041026193647.GB40173>