Re: OS For IIGS

[wsmith@ctron.com (Will Smith)]

On 25 Nov 1997 17:34:44 GMT, !smentzer@pacbell.net (Steve Mentzer)
wrote:

|>...... I can set up a 
|>P200 box w/64megs of ram with NT40sp3 and office 97 in 45 minutes. That is a 
|>fact, and nothing you can say or do can dispute that.

so?  what's your point?  last time i checked, this is WAAAAAAAY
off-topic, even if i DO side with the *nix fan.

|>UNIX - The choice OS for a generation of unix hackers and gurus who cannot see 
|>the benefit of using a mainstream consumer driven OS in the workplace because 
|>they are so afraid of losing their beloved "job security".

let's discuss "mainstream".  better yet, let's discuss the fact that
the ONLY reason that Win* "dominates the market" is because of
skillful marketing on the part of PunySquishy.  they don't have an
original idea in their collective heads.

"mainstream" is a relative term.  before Win* was pushed so hard, the
Apple ][ series was a good contender.  (i think it is still a good
machine, even if it is a bit slow by today's standards....)
mainstream is what just HAPPENS to be most common at the time.

|>I will give you one thing. Unix is far more stable than NT will EVER be. But 

so's OS/2, but nobody uses OS/2.

|>you cannot go to the store and pick up Office97 for unix.

that brings us back to the marketing thing.  PunySquishy will NEVER
offer Office for *nix because that would give users a CHOICE of OS....
they know that anyone with half a brain will choose anything over
Win*....

|> And not every employee has Unix at home.

no, but they SHOULD....

|> Face it, the workplace is consumer driven, 
|>regardless of what your preference is. NT is the best of both worlds.

uh-huh.  sure.  and politicians aren't liars, either.

|> It is 
|>rock solid, and it runs the great productivity software that my users need to 
|>function on a daily basis. With NT my users can work.

interesting thought.  i've seen nothing but PROBLEMS with NT.  sure,
it's stable....   .....for about three months.  THEN you have to do a
complete re-install.  (if there's more than "just installing it" and
then using apps, then there's something in the install process that
PunySquishy has forgotten....)

|> With Unix, they can work, 
|>and I have to pay 2 unix gurus $100k a year to maintain an aging (and 
|>increasingly incompatible) network OS.

interesting theory.  shame it doesn't hold water.  (1) i can find
several "unix gurus" that would work for less than $100k/year, (2)
granted unix is aging.  so is EVERYTHING.  Time marches on, eh?
(3) "incompatible"?!?  PUH-LEASE!  if it's got IP, then it'll
communicate with *nix.  simple.  done.  i think you're confusing
something that makes the Internet work (IP) with something that is
sluggish, poorly designed, and worthless (NetBEUI, Win*'s protocol of
choice).......

if you wish to carry this discussion furthur, i'll be happy to take
e-mail.  this has already gotten WAY off topic.


|>
|>
|>smentzer@ecom.net
|>