From: "Adam Flinton" 


"Rich"  wrote in message news:3e6a48e1{at}w3.nls.net...
 "  For all your talk you haven't mentioned any example of Linux having more
functionality.  I should think you can find a couple while the list I gave
for Windows already is long and is just the tip of the iceberg."

Yes I have go back & read the posts.

To repeat.....Where is the equivalent Windows functionality for doing
massive distributed computing clusters such as those used by oil comps etc?

"   If you want to take the view that what's in the box is the OS, and if
you want to subscribe to this you better be careful because it can work
against you, then please tell me which box it is to which you refer.  When
I tried to make a box comparison using red hat's product Robert claimed
that he wouldn't use this.  You have multiple times refused to respond to
the comparison that was the topic of this thread that red hat's annual
subscription cost for their linux plus stronghold server is more than four
to six times this cost of the Windows solution."

I don't, it is Geo's point. Myself I do tend to view the OS without all
sorts of stuff as the OS. E.g. I don't tend to think of the X Windows
stuff/GUI as being part of the OS wrt to running an box as a server let
alone the Webserver etc.

"   You also need to get your facts straight before you make false claims.
Windows has had an SMTP server included for years."

Really? Where what & what Windows iteration/model?

"  Even the desktop Professional Edition includes this. "

I am writing this on Win2K pro now so where is the SMTP server?

" Windows Server 2003 includes a POP server."

Really? Good to see competition playing out for the benefit of the consumer.

"  Multiple databases have been included for years.  "

Really? Simple help subsystems or something that anyone can use with some
sort of SQL front end & network availability?

"Select the appropriate server edition and you get not just IMAP but
full blown Exchange."

Good. Nice to see competiton palying it's part in helping to drive the
windows feature set.


Adam


  "Adam Flinton"  wrote in message
news:3e69c0d1$1{at}w3.nls.net...

  "Rich"  wrote in message news:3e694a6a$1{at}w3.nls.net...
   "  Because linux does have less functionality.  "

  In some areas yes. As a blanket statement no. You could show some areas
  where windows is ahead & I could show some where Linux is ahead.

  "You often find discussions of what it takes to catch up.  The file
systems
  you mentioned are all very recent and still don't have the functionality
of
  NTFS which has been in production release for over a decade.  You don't
have
  to look hard to find discussion of the samba folks working on catching up
to
  the seven year old Windows NT 4.0.  You already ignored three times the
  mention of the lack of ACLs and integrated security.  Remote management,
  Active Directory, group policy are more examples.  Is it really necessary
to
  continue with this?  We haven't even touched applications.  Before you
think
  of coming back with a mention of add-on packages, remember that not only
  aren't these linux, many, particularly the common ones, are also available
  for Windows."

  Yup but you also find discussions of where linux is to a degree the only
  game in town (e.g. large compute clusters for oil comps). Re all the stuff
  like ACL'es etc.etc.etc like I said above you could find stuff where
windows
  "has more functionality" & I could find stuff where linux
"has more
  functionality". It would be a fairly pointless exercise. Also I am not the
  one making statements like "It's well known windows has less
functionality",
  you are.

  In terms of add on packages then take Geo's view that "what's in the box
is
  the OS" & you would see that you get far more "OS" for
your money with
linux
  (e.g. 2 SQLDB'es, IMAP/POP3/SMTP server (again possibly more than one)
  etc.etc.).

  I have to say though that having Windows along for the ride is definitely
  good for linux e.g. I would hope that what with .Net coming out, most
  distribs would include a good 1.3/1.4 JVM & JBOSS &/or Tomcat
& Eclipse /
  Netbeans.

  The problem MS is going to find is that from both a pricing POV & a legal
  POV it might not be able to provide the same coverage of server side
  processes "in the box".

  Anyway. Don't complain about people putting out generalizations which are
so
  broad that they are patently & demonstrably false & then do the exact same
  thing yourself.




  Rich

    "Adam Flinton"  wrote in message
  news:3e69441a$1{at}w3.nls.net...
    Even so the main argument Rich has is that people tend to make broad
    generalizations which are not true partly because of their
generalization
    e.g. "linux is more secure than Win2k"

    So then what is  "It's well known that Linux has less functionality" if
  not
    the exact thing he is complaining about?

    Adam


    "Geo."  wrote in message
news:3e694080{at}w3.nls.net...
    > "Adam Flinton"  wrote in message
    > news:3e692dfe{at}w3.nls.net...
    >
    > > e.g re NTFS How many Journalled File Systems has Windows got? XFS?
  JFS?
    > > Ext3? ReiserFS?
    >
    > NTFS has more than all those rolled into one.
    >
    > Geo.
    >
    >

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-4