Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 17 Dec 1999 04:46:44 +0200
From:      Giorgos Keramidas <charon@hades.hell.gr>
To:        John <papalia@UDel.Edu>
Cc:        freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Need to justify FreeBSD vs. Win2K
Message-ID:  <19991217044644.A7320@hades.hell.gr>
In-Reply-To: <4.1.19991215224130.009ed100@mail.udel.edu>
References:  <4.1.19991215224130.009ed100@mail.udel.edu>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Dec 15, 1999 at 10:49:43PM -0500, John wrote:
| Hey all,
| 
| I've been helping my old boss to design a WAN for the company.  What it
| will consist of is three offices connected by Frame Relay.  All main
| servers centralized to one office, the other two to be remote.  The remote
| offices will have fileservers/routers.  The main office will have:

Your best chance to having them at least thinking about what you're
suggesting is always to show them some 'real' thing; i.e. with the
information that you presented here, design some network topology
diagram with the BSD boxen and the other computers neatly arranged and
a small description of what each one can do.

IT managers tend to be sensitive on direct monetary earnings too.  Show
them how a single BSD box can be a router and firewall, and how another
one can be a mail and web server at the same time.  Take care to
present in clear and very illustrative terms how a BSD box can take the
load of several NT boxes, and still function like a charm.

On machines where security is a concern, present the relative merits of
each operating system (NT vs. BSD), and try to be honest.  Do not start
a quick and dirty `NT is unsafe' raving thing, because you'll get them
to be defensive right from the start -- and that's where you lose.

| I need help justifying one against the other.  Any thoughts?
| 
| Here's the needs:
| - Ease of maintenance
| - GREAT stability
| - High security

`Ease' of maintenance is something that means different things to
technical staff, and higher IT management.  It's all a matter of how
one defines the word `ease'.  Do not fail to note that for someone
trained on BSD, NT is not as easy as one might initially assume.  Of
course, this is still true the other way round.

Stability is also something that you need to present with actual case
studies.  Thank goodness, the servers of .freebsd.org are good starting
points, and those who are using FreeBSD for their servers (see the
relevant links in http://www.freebsd.org/) will provide you with more
data to stand up to your point.

As far as security is concerned, I do not know of any real-world cases
but I'm relatively new to FreeBSD (since I've been using it for about 5
or 6 months now) and I'm sorry but I can't help in any way.

| If I walk, they really don't have an IT guy.  The one they have is
| supposed to be an "NT guru", but I had to explain to him what a hosts
| file is for. I don't hold much hope for him lasting long.

Do not in any circumstances over-emphasize that.  It will probably get
them thinking that they can not find someone with adequate knowledge of
BSD if you are later going somewhere else, and that is the same as
saying that they will be locked in BSD with no one to support them. 
This is not a good thing at all, IMHO.

| My concern is that they install an MS network now, and spend an
| eternity doing upgrades and security patches on a monthly basis, with
| the every present fear of MS turning off the support (ala Win3.1 -->
| win95).

This is a very good point, and you should not fail to explain this
fact to your managers.  Make sure you make them understand that FreeBSD
does not make one go through this insane upgrade-once-a-week race, and
that it can work for a looong time without you having to spend too much
time on upgrades.  This will give you that little extra bit of time to
concentrace on more important things than simple upgrades, and they
will probably quickly realize why this is important.

| My thougths were that with a well configured and well documented
| FreeBSD network, they'll be running solid until a) the first breakin,
| b) the first major crash

which will probably be a hardware failure, and not just a patch that
made internet explorer unstable,if not unusable...

| c) a security upgrade is necessary (like the recent need to update
| RSAREF2),

which is usually published and fixed as soon as possible...

| or d), we're up to v.6.x-stable, and they're running 3.x-stable, and
| a new port comes out that they REALLY need that only runs on the
| newer versions.

which is a truly rare thing to happen, unless you have a constantly
changing environment, and if it happens is as easy to fix as a
reinstall of everything just because windows 2016 does not run on
windows 2001...

| Any thoughts of how to reason this out with them, or where I might
| find more information?

Try the sites of those who actually use FreeBSD until now.  You can
find many links for that in http://www.freebsd.org/ [sorry for not
providing a more direct link, I'm offline now that I'm writing].

-- 
Giorgos Keramidas, <keramida@ceid.upatras.gr>
"What we have to learn to do, we learn by doing." [Aristotle]


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19991217044644.A7320>