in reply to Re^2: The worst case scenario
in thread The worst case scenario
I had heard that, too, but the last word I'd heard (again, a while back) was that Management (!) was insistent upon eliminating BSD, no matter how many (hundreds of) boxen they had to add.
<SHAMELESS PLUG>
Here, our whole division's DNS and routing trees, and quite a few of our heavy load servers, are now happily FreeBSD. Every time the NT-oriented senior folks have a "moment", they task a junior admin with the problem and he solves it with FreeBSD. Our CAD systems admin would love to replace the RHL-E3 boxen that are used for EDA chip-simulation runs with FreeBSD, but he keeps running into places where the apps are Linux-specific, such as expecting a non-standard xterm. For the tools for which they do work, they're both faster and much more load-tolerant than the RH machines.
</SHAMELESS PLUG>
We SHALL overcome! :D
Don Wilde
"There's more than one level to any answer."
<SHAMELESS PLUG>
Here, our whole division's DNS and routing trees, and quite a few of our heavy load servers, are now happily FreeBSD. Every time the NT-oriented senior folks have a "moment", they task a junior admin with the problem and he solves it with FreeBSD. Our CAD systems admin would love to replace the RHL-E3 boxen that are used for EDA chip-simulation runs with FreeBSD, but he keeps running into places where the apps are Linux-specific, such as expecting a non-standard xterm. For the tools for which they do work, they're both faster and much more load-tolerant than the RH machines.
</SHAMELESS PLUG>
We SHALL overcome! :D
Don Wilde
"There's more than one level to any answer."
|
---|
Replies are listed 'Best First'. | |
---|---|
Re^4: The worst case scenario
by BerntB (Deacon) on May 20, 2006 at 23:30 UTC |
In Section
Past Polls