Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 11:21:26 -0800 From: "Jeremiah Gowdy" <jeremiah@sherline.com> To: "Anthony Atkielski" <anthony@freebie.atkielski.com>, "Brian Raynes" <brian_raynes@dnr.state.ak.us> Cc: <freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Prevalence of FreeBSD and UNIX among servers Message-ID: <002901c17cf8$de517ae0$03e2cbd8@server> References: <00ef01c17cda$6b419760$0a00000a@atkielski.com> <3C0D0426.BEC515D7@dnr.state.ak.us> <007801c17ce9$78df5150$03e2cbd8@server> <010301c17cf5$b2a3de40$0a00000a@atkielski.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > I know, I make my living setting FreeBSD Server/ > > Windows 2000 Desktop networks. > > What arguments did you use to persuade clients to accept FreeBSD servers with Windows 2000 desktops--and why did you prefer that > configuration yourself (if you did)? I have deployed or converted several networks to the FreeBSD/Win2k model. They are _very_ reliable. I find Windows 2000 to be the most reliable version of Windows while still posessing enough features to make it useful. I setup my FreeBSD servers with Samba, qmail, and a transparent bridge/firewall configuration on the WAN. Basically, when I am called into a job, the company has already made up it's mind that it's unhappy with the Microsoft or (ugh) Novell servers they already have. I simply explain to the clients that their users will not see any difference in the services provided (file serving, email, firewall protection, virus scanning of email, network-workstation backups). What they will see is a drastic reduction in network services downtime. Often they will see improved performance on the fileserver with Samba. All you can really do is make promises and deliver on them. Usually a company will allow you to install one server in a non-critical area to demonstrate the functionality. Once you've shown the server's OS is transparent to the user, and that the FreeBSD server will continue to run until the heat death of the universe, they will go along with a total conversion. If you are having a hard time convincing them to move into the FreeBSD world, show them the uptimes on some of your personal servers or previous clients. Most companies will be more than happy to discover that they don't need so many MCSEs on their staff. Of course, the Microsoft people working at the company will hate you. The Unix guy who's come in to install a strange server that runs on it's own with more performance and reliability than the NT/2K servers that it takes 3-4+ MCSEs to maintain. That's really the biggest problem converting companies. Preexisting IT staff. Simply question management on the uptimes and reliability of their current configuration. They will jump at the promise of a more reliable configuration. If the MCSEs try to naysay you, tell them there's a difference between a college degree and certs, and that any fool can buy an MCSE in TJ for $100. It's quite easy to convince managers that their IT staff is substandard and overpaid, since they've been thinking that to themselves for months. I'm sure I've made it clear I enjoy breaking up the happy little world of MCSEs and the companies they're hoodwinking. ___________________________________________ Jeremiah Gowdy IT Manager - Senior Network Administrator Sherline Products Inc 3235 Executive Ridge Vista CA 92083-8527 IT Dept: 760-727-9492 Sales: 1-800-541-0735 International: (760) 727-5857 Fax: (760) 727-7857 ___________________________________________ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?002901c17cf8$de517ae0$03e2cbd8>