<?xml version="1.0" encoding="windows-1252"?>
<node id="550066" title="Re^3: The worst case scenario" created="2006-05-17 15:36:06" updated="2006-05-17 11:36:06">
<type id="11">
note</type>
<author id="420266">
samizdat</author>
<data>
<field name="doctext">
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. 
&lt;BR&gt;&lt;BR&gt;
&amp;lt;SHAMELESS PLUG&amp;gt;&lt;BR&gt;&lt;BR&gt;
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.&lt;BR&gt;&lt;BR&gt;&amp;lt;/SHAMELESS PLUG&amp;gt;
&lt;BR&gt;&lt;BR&gt;
We SHALL overcome! :D
&lt;div class="pmsig"&gt;&lt;div class="pmsig-420266"&gt;
&lt;BR&gt;&lt;EM&gt;Don Wilde&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;BR&gt;
&lt;FONT COLOR='#4F8EFF'&gt;"&lt;i&gt;There's more than one level to any answer.&lt;/i&gt;"&lt;/FONT&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</field>
<field name="root_node">
549381</field>
<field name="parent_node">
549897</field>
</data>
</node>
