NT's SFM 'services'
thomas kase(thomas[at]accessio.com)
Tue, 15 Dec 1998 20:59:23 -0500
> Subject: Re: WinMac Digest #160 - 12/07/98
> From: Dan Schwartz <expresso@snip.net>
> Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 20:22:06 -0500
>
> One of the strongest points of NT's Services for Macintosh -- And NT in
> general -- is NTFS. We all know what a joke HFS is on large volumes; and
> what a disaster HFS+ is (at least until Norton Utilities 4.0 came out a few
> weeks ago). NTFS is much more robust, and self-healing to a point. And if a
> file is corrupted, the OS will lock it out.
Dan,
First of all let's stop carping about old stuff like plain HFS, shall we?
Since this is the WINDOWS - MacOS list, wanna talk FAT? Didn't think
so ;-)
NTFS is definitely a nice technology - I like the way you can slice
multiple drives into one volume for example. The group/user access
possibilities are other areas where NTFS shines.
In some areas NTFS is way ahead of NT itself. Its Alternative Data Streams
that keep track of Mac files' resource fork is one example of a piece of
technology that NT doesn't utilize itself.
Other areas where NT has yet to catch up with itself is NT's Domain Model
where any number of users above, say 1000, the system becomes unmanageable.
A minor comment, and supposedly NT5 will fix that, some day.
> SFM is not perfect; but for file and print services it is quite good.
You are welcome to come and take a look at our HP LaserJet being 'served'
by an NT4 box - quite erratic service indeed - completely inconsistent
across our NT boxes. The only ones that are happy are the Macs - because
they print directly over the printer's AppleTalk - skipping NT, thankfully.
> the other hand, opening up an NT server to the outside world can indeed
> cause problems; and M$ Exchange 5.5 absolutely sucks.
Absolutely and NT is only certified as secure if used as a stand-alone...
Somehow the idea of a server loses its appeal as a stand-alone ;-)
> But, we were specifically discussing NT/Server's Services for Macintosh vs
> ASIP 6.x -- Let's compare apples to apples and not digress into other uses
> of the NOS. If I wanted to discuss security issues to the outside world,
> then I would recommend Novell's IntraNetWare and/or Border Patrol instead.
> Unfortunately, Novell's ATALK.NLM and AFP.NLM don't provide good file and
> print performance for Macs.
Aren't we avoiding the issue? Fact is that SFM on NT is old, clunky and buggy
as well as offering far lower throughput than ASIP does.
> [One of the reasons why NT, in general, is so robust is that it came from
> Dave Cutler -- The same developer as DIGITAL's OpenVMS.]
Dave Cutler didn't touch NT4 - he built the previous versions. Which is why
NT4 stinks. NTFS isn't even Cutler's work - that was done by a buddy of his.
Cutler has only been involved to a small degree in NT5.
> Also, digressing just a bit, about the hardware these NOS' run on...
And I guess all of us need all these different platforms? Also, how about
all the conflicts from running on so much? Ever tried installing NT5 (albeit
beta)? How many times did you have to try? On how many machines? Tried
on a laptop?
> One of the biggest problems with ASIP 6.x is that it only runs on a Mac...
> It will not run on an RS/6000. And let's face it, the Mac tower case,
> albeit improved from the Quadra 800 variety, still stinks.
You can buy third party rack stuff I you want - plenty out there.
> Compare the quality of the hardware on an Apple 8600 to a Compaq ProLiant
> or IBM PC Server 325 -- There is no comparison -- The Apple product is a
> toy. Where are the hot-swap trays? Where are the bountiful PCI slots? Where
> is the rugged power supply? Where is the compatibility with hardware RAID
> cards?
Macs don't need that many PCI slots to start out with - load a Wintel box
with all the various cards it needs just to boot and what are you left with?
About the same as on a Mac!
All the extra goodies are already available for the Mac - for the few % of
the market that wants them, there is plenty available.
> And if you don't like the rePentium (x86) platform, you also have the
> choice of running NT on a 600 mHz DEC Alpha. And AlphaNT is even more
> stable than x86/NT.
And NT is SOOOO easy to install on Alpha. You're getting beyond the point
of being ridiculous here Dan. Seriously, most people have problems with
regular NT installations.
Also, if Mac runs on too few machines for you - why jump into the Alpha box?
No Dan, as usual it comes down to you grinding the Apple ax.
However, I fully agree that NTFS is a beautiful thing - too bad it has to sit
inside such a crummy OS.
Thomas Kase
accessio.com inc., 33 south main street, #7, south norwalk, ct 06854
phone: 203.866.4454 fax: 203.866.4546
email: thomas@accessio.com
\\\\ the bridge to Japan (TM) \\\\
--=----------next-message-----------=
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b2
on Sun Dec 20 1998 - 15:58:59 PST
|