Re: [WinMac] Re: Email Choices - Hardware & software

John C. Welch(jwelch[at]aer.com)
Tue, 23 Mar 1999 12:04:30 -0500

        That would be a valid comparison if Apple was as low-quality a vendor
as say Dell, or Gateway.
I have an 8600/300 webserver averages 90+ day uptimes, and in two years,
has had one hardware failure, a burnt power supply, (this is also
attached to a UPS of some size).

        I have a Compaq ProLiant 1600R that we still haven't been able to
install the hotswap power supplies because Compaq hasn't sent us one
that functions yet, (waiting on try #3).

        I have a G3/300 server that has only had one fault, and that is one
drive in a mirrored set went bad once. Since it was in a hotswap drive
tower, I swapped, rebuilt the mirror, no harm done. It's average uptime
has been 3 to 4 months.

I worked on an AS/400 that to date, hasn't crashed once since 1992.

        Reliability is not a function of doo-dads in the construction of the
case, but of the care the vendor takes in building their stuff.

        That is also why you see Mac Pluses circa 1986 still running like mad.
Slow, but well-built and reliable. Although nothing can eliminate
Murphy's law, you can make it happen few and far between.

        Anyone who talks about NT being exceptionally stable is not facing
reality. Compared to Unix and AS/400s, NT is a joke and a half. I have
OS/2 running a voicemail server that hasn't crashed in over 3 years of
24x7 usage, and this is without hotswappable or redundant anything. I
have yet to see a 24x7 NT box approaching that level of reliability. I
also have seen well - configured Macs be as reliable as any other OS.
COnversely, I have seen poorly configured AS/400s crashes monthly.
Stability and reliability are tenuous things, and cannot be reduced to
on item, like the OS. It takes care, and perseverance and planning to
achieve real reliability, and this is the SYSAdmin's job much more than
the hardware/software's.

        One thing to be wary of with Exchange is that if you use the native Mac
client, instead of the Web Access client, the ONLY mail that your Mac
clients will get is Exchange mail only, no IMAP or POP. Also, for a lot
of it's functionality, Exchange requires IIS. It also requires an NT
domain structure. Now Microsoft, if prodded admits that the Domain
controller should be standalone, as should the Exchange server, and the
IIS server. So now it's 3 boxes. If you want reliability, you have to
set up failovers, so now it's 6 boxes. Oh, we need a backup domain
controller, so now it's 8 boxes, if you want high
access/speed/availability. Not so economical, is it? On the other hand,
2 Netware 5 servers could handle this, or a single AS/400 running Domino
server. NT is only cheap in the shrink-wrap in the box. Once you use it,
it gets very expensive, very quickly. Also, compared to someone like
IBM, Microsoft's tech support is so sad as to be humorous.

        Yes, a 'pro' level case with redundancy built in is very desirable, BUT
with a little planning, you can get the same redundancy for almost every
component in a Mac as you can in a high - end Intel box, the notable
exception being the power supply, and I *dearly* wish either Apple or
someone else would take care of that.

"Daniel L. Schwartz" wrote:
>
> Curtis nailed the software issue against using a Mac-based enterprise
> solution; and I still stand on my hardware concerns about the G3's being
> unsuitable for 24/7 duty.
>
> I guess you could say that OS-X and ASIP represent the "Peter Principle:"
> Promotion (of the Mac platform) to the level of its incompetency.
>
> Cheers!
> Dan
>
> At 08:43 AM 3/23/99 -0500, Curtis wrote:
> >On Tue, 23 Mar 1999, Grant Ball wrote:
> >
> >> The paper has 200 users split 50/50 between PC's and macs. Novell and PC's
> >> are on the business side and editorial, classified and production use macs.
> >> Currently only about 80 of them have email and I was asked about bringing
> >> the rest on board. We have several AppleShare servers, one of which
> handles
> >> email for PC's and macs, as well as an FTP site. The server is an 8500/200
> >> with 64 megs of RAM.
> >>
> >> The fellow I work with is a CNE and when he heard the request, instantly
> >> went into a rant about how unstable macs and IP6 is for email and that NT
> >> and Exchange would be a better solution. I don't really care about which to
> >> use since using Exchange would be cool for me since I'm still a newbe to
> the
> >> NT world and this would give me a chance to use some of my new knowledge.
> >>
> >> Now, the rub is money (isn't it always.) We already have NT and Exchange
> and
> >> we build PC hardware (all Intel stuff so it's HCL compliant) in house. The
> >> catch is, we only have 25 CAL's for Exchange and the paper doesn't want to
> >> spend any money if at all possible. My thinking is IP6 and email seem to
> >> work well, how about just adding the users and Bob's your uncle. Am I
> >> sailing into disaster thinking I can do this? Should I also consider adding
> >> more RAM to the server? Should I tell the paper to go the NT route and suck
> >> up whatever costs that that will incur? What are your thoughts?
> >
> >I know almost nothing about IP6 but I know that email needs high
> >availability and the MacOS (pre OS X) probably isn't good enough. I know
> >there are all kinds of people running Mac based mail servers and there are
> >even free ones but as much as I like it I'm just not comfortable with
> >pre-OS X as a server OS. If you had some UNIX experience or some money to
> >spend I might suggest going that route. I'd say go with NT but not with
> >Exchange. There are a number of quality mail servers for NT which are
> >free/cheap. I like IMAP but POP is much more common and you may not need
> >IMAP's advantages. Figure out how much the CALs would cost and see how
> >they compare to the mail-only server software available. I can't recommend
> >a particular one but someone on another list who seems to be pretty
> >experienced likes VPOP3 <http://www.pscs.co.uk/>
> >
> >--
> >Curtis Wilcox cwcx@ats.rochester.edu
> >Eastman School of Music x41160
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
> <mailto:expresso@snip.net, Dan@Hemnet.com>
>
> ALTERNATE: <mailto:expresso@workmail.com>
>
> Webmaster for <http://www.Faulknerstudios.com>,
> <http://www.BrakeAndGo.com>
>
> **Your Corel Solution Partner**
>
> **Your UltraBac Solution Source**
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
> * Windows-MacOS Cooperation List *

* Windows-MacOS Cooperation List *

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b2 on Tue Mar 23 1999 - 09:10:26 PST