From: "Rich" 

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_02C8_01C2E569.CC7DD2C0
Content-Type: text/plain;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

   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.

   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.

   You also need to get your facts straight before you make false =
claims.  Windows has had an SMTP server included for years.  Even the =
desktop Professional Edition includes this.  Windows Server 2003 = includes
a POP server.  Multiple databases have been included for years. =
 Select the appropriate server edition and you get not just IMAP but =
full blown Exchange.

Rich

  "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.
    >
    >



------=_NextPart_000_02C8_01C2E569.CC7DD2C0
Content-Type: text/html;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable








   For all
your talk you =
haven't=20
mentioned any example of Linux having more functionality.  I
should = think=20
you can find a couple while the list I gave for Windows already is long = and is=20
just the tip of the iceberg.
 
   If you
want to take the =
view that=20
what's in the box is the OS, and if you want to subscribe to this you = better be=20
careful because it can work against you, then please tell me which box = it is to=20
which you refer.  When I tried to make a box comparison using red = hat's=20
product Robert claimed that he wouldn't use this.  You have =
multiple times=20
refused to respond to the comparison that was the topic of this thread = that red=20
hat's annual subscription cost for their linux plus stronghold server is = more=20
than four to six times this cost of the Windows solution.
 
   You also
need to get your =
facts=20
straight before you make false claims.  Windows has had an SMTP = server=20
included for years.  Even the desktop Professional Edition includes =

this.  Windows Server 2003 includes a POP server. 
Multiple = databases=20
have been included for years.  Select the appropriate server =
edition and=20
you get not just IMAP but full blown Exchange.
 
Rich
 

  "Adam Flinton" <adam{at}NOSPAMsoftfab.com>">mailto:adam{at}NOSPAMsoftfab.com">adam{at}NOSPAMsoftfab.com>
=
wrote in=20
  message news:3e69c0d1$1{at}w3.nls.net..."Rich"=20
  <{at}> wrote in message news:3e694a6a$1{at}w3.nls.net...=
 " =20
  Because linux does have less functionality. 
"In some =
areas yes.=20
  As a blanket statement no. You could show some areaswhere windows =
is ahead=20
  & I could show some where Linux is
ahead."You often find=20
  discussions of what it takes to catch up.  The file =
systemsyou=20
  mentioned are all very recent and still don't have the functionality=20
  ofNTFS which has been in production release for over a =
decade.  You=20
  don't haveto look hard to find discussion of the samba folks =
working on=20
  catching up tothe seven year old Windows NT 4.0.  You already =
ignored=20
  three times themention of the lack of ACLs and integrated =
security. =20
  Remote management,Active Directory, group policy are more =
examples. =20
  Is it really necessary tocontinue with this?  We haven't even =
touched=20
  applications.  Before you thinkof coming back with a mention =
of=20
  add-on packages, remember that not onlyaren't these linux, many,=20
  particularly the common ones, are also availablefor =
Windows."Yup=20
  but you also find discussions of where linux is to a degree the =
onlygame=20
  in town (e.g. large compute clusters for oil comps). Re all the =
stufflike=20
  ACL'es etc.etc.etc like I said above you could find stuff where=20
  windows"has more functionality" & I could
find stuff where =
linux "has=20
  morefunctionality". It would be a fairly pointless exercise. Also =
I am not=20
  theone making statements like "It's well known windows has less=20
  functionality",you are.In terms of add
on packages then =
take Geo's=20
  view that "what's in the box isthe OS" & you
would see that =
you get=20
  far more "OS" for your money with linux(e.g. 2 SQLDB'es, =
IMAP/POP3/SMTP=20
  server (again possibly more than
one)etc.etc.).I have to =
say=20
  though that having Windows along for the ride is definitelygood =
for linux=20
  e.g. I would hope that what with .Net coming out, mostdistribs =
would=20
  include a good 1.3/1.4 JVM & JBOSS &/or Tomcat & Eclipse=20
  /Netbeans.The problem MS is going to find
is that from =
both a=20
  pricing POV & a legalPOV it might not be able to provide the =
same=20
  coverage of server sideprocesses "in the
box".Anyway. =
Don't=20
  complain about people putting out generalizations which are =
sobroad that=20
  they are patently & demonstrably false & then do the exact=20
  samething
yourself.Rich 
"Adam =
Flinton"=20
  <adam{at}NOSPAMsoftfab.com>=20">mailto:adam{at}NOSPAMsoftfab.com">adam{at}NOSPAMsoftfab.com>=20
  wrote in messagenews:3e69441a$1{at}w3.nls.net...=
 =20
  Even so the main argument Rich has is that people tend to make =
broad =20
  generalizations which are not true partly because of their=20
  generalization  e.g. "linux is more secure than =
Win2k" =20
  So then what is  "It's well known that Linux has less =
functionality"=20
  ifnot  the exact thing he is complaining =
about? =20
  Adam  "Geo." <georger{at}nls.net>">mailto:georger{at}nls.net">georger{at}nls.net>
wrote in =
message news:3e694080{at}w3.nls.net...&nbs=
p; >=20
  "Adam Flinton" <adam{at}NOSPAMsoftfab.com>">mailto:adam{at}NOSPAMsoftfab.com">adam{at}NOSPAMsoftfab.com>
=
wrote in=20
  message  > news:3e692dfe{at}w3.nls.net...&nbs=
p;=20
  >  > > e.g re NTFS How many
Journalled File Systems =
has=20
  Windows got? XFS?JFS?  > > Ext3? =
ReiserFS? =20
  >  > NTFS has more than all those rolled into =
one. =20
  >  > Geo. 
> =20
>

------=_NextPart_000_02C8_01C2E569.CC7DD2C0--

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