Low/No Cost Unix

[Scott Williams <swill41@jcpenney.com>]

>> Can I call up a team of
>> engineers at Red Hat if I have a problem? Sun is always there for me. I can

>If you've bought RedHat Linux, yes.  What do you think they're selling?
>Linux?  Give me a break - that's copyrighted software, with a license
>which specifically proscribes selling it.  The media?  You're kidding,
>right?

I'm just saying that the level of trust is not there to put my shop's OS on a 
version of Unix like that. I never implied that you were purchasing Linux from 
Red Hat, just questioning their ability to provide effective support at the 
levels of Sun, HP, Digital, etc...


>> depend on it. Yes, I'll pay for that. But again, Unix is in the big shop,
>> where the application needs real power. So, our focus turns to the smaller
>> shops. Can they, and will they, spend the money for a commercialy released 
and
>> supported Unix? Do they even need it? NT will get the job done just as well.

>Oh, really?  You must have a version of NT I've never seen...
>
>Ed

Probably not. I would never question Your expertise. But really, you should 
have included the rest of my response, where I said that NT can get the job 
done as a fileserver, in a small shop environment. I've seen NT on a Compaq 
1500 support 200 users in a small publishing shop, very well. They were using 
Interleaf, and it was very intensive for that level. NT worked great. I'm not 
saying that Unix would not work better, oh quite the opposite. Unix installed 
doing the same thing would be fantastic. But, equipment, software, 
installation, support costs were factors. Unix would have been almost $460k 
and NT cost $212k. The NT route was chosen. No regrets. I would, however, 
question NT's ability to control a DP environment.

Scott