NT vs Novell

NT vs Novell

Post by Riggs » Tue, 14 Jan 1997 04:00:00



I am the CADD Manager for St. Paul District Corps of Engineers, and we
have UNIX, Windows NT, and Novell.  We have far less problems with Windows
NT and UNIX than Novell.  I would not recommend Novell, but our IS
department thinks it nessessary.

 
 
 

NT vs Novell

Post by geu.. » Fri, 24 Jan 1997 04:00:00



Quote:>I am the CADD Manager for St. Paul District Corps of Engineers, and we
>have UNIX, Windows NT, and Novell.  We have far less problems with Windows
>NT and UNIX than Novell.  I would not recommend Novell, but our IS
>department thinks it nessessary.

Sounds like the contrairy to every comment I ever heard from people in my
environment. What possible problems can there be with Novell? It's such a simple,
stable and robust file server, I don't think you can compare NT with it.
You'll need a PC about twice as big (RAM and CPU -wise) to get the same
performance on an NT server.

UNIX, I don't even consider, anymore. Not for a file/print server. To messy.

Werner Geuens
IS section
Tractebel Development



 
 
 

NT vs Novell

Post by Mark Hamstr » Fri, 24 Jan 1997 04:00:00


[snip]

Quote:> UNIX, I don't even consider, anymore. Not for a file/print server. To messy.

Linux: file/print services for NFS/lpd, Netware3 & 4, WfW/W95/NT,
Appletalk... not to mention more esoteric stuff like AX.25 packet radio
and very useful stuff like web service, routing, bridging, etc., etc.,
etc.... all high-performance, stable, and free.

I'll take messes like that any day.

Mark Hamstra

 
 
 

NT vs Novell

Post by Robert Har » Fri, 24 Jan 1997 04:00:00


Quote:> Sounds like the contrairy to every comment I ever heard from people in my
> environment. What possible problems can there be with Novell? It's such a
simple,
> stable and robust file server, I don't think you can compare NT with it.
> You'll need a PC about twice as big (RAM and CPU -wise) to get the same
> performance on an NT server.

SOUNDS LIKE????

You obviously have never had to actually do it!!

I have worked with Novell for Seven Years. It is not simple, not robust,
not easy
and at times can be a piece of crap.

IFF you know what you are doing it can ( and does ) blow NT away on
performance.
but you must know what you are doing.

Quote:

> UNIX, I don't even consider, anymore. Not for a file/print server. To
messy.

No more of a mess then buggy drivers on NT. ( and linux is FREE )

--
Robert Hart
My Opinions are my own and don't refliect those of
the City of Edmonton or assoiciated companies

 
 
 

NT vs Novell

Post by Hank Leininge » Sun, 26 Jan 1997 04:00:00




> (RiggsLA) writes:
> >I am the CADD Manager for St. Paul District Corps of Engineers, and
> >we have UNIX, Windows NT, and Novell.  We have far less problems
> >with Windows NT and UNIX than Novell.  I would not recommend
> >Novell, but our IS department thinks it nessessary.
> Sounds like the contrairy to every comment I ever heard from people
> in my environment. What possible problems can there be with Novell?
> It's such a simple, stable and robust file server, I don't think you
> can compare NT with it.  You'll need a PC about twice as big (RAM
> and CPU -wise) to get the same performance on an NT server.
> UNIX, I don't even consider, anymore. Not for a file/print server.
> To messy.

In years past, maybe.  I have yet to see an NFS client package for
Windows that was worthy of carrying my data, so that is indeed out
if your clients are Windows machines.  But Samba, and commercial apps
like it, which allow a UNIX box to export filesystems using SMB, the
"native" windows filesharing protocol, change that drastically.

I certainly agree with your comments about resource requirements of
NT vs. Novell.  Novell definitely has the edge there.  NT has its
plusses as well; in my opinion, it's got a set of strengths and
weaknesses which are almost a mirror-image of those of Novell.  But in
my experience, one can get as good if not better performance from UNIX
on the same server hardware as Novell, never mind NT.  And you can
have better stability than either, better remote (user- and
administrator-)connectivity than either, more scalable hardware
options, and freely available add-on tools to add features which for
the other environments would be considerable extra-cost options,
expensive third-party solutions, or which simply wouldn't be possible.

This newsgroup probably isn't the place for an OS war, so I'll try not
to add any more fuel after this (feel free to challenge me in email or
move this discussion to an *.advocacy group, however).  However I will
close by saying that if your company is large enough or is growing
steadily, think about a UNIX-based server solution (and since a free
UNIX could be serving files from the 486 your secretary just replaced,
maybe you should think about it no matter what).  If done right, it
does work; you'd be surprised how well.  If done right, it does save
you money; you'd be surprised how much.


Senior Systems Integrator
Progressive Computer Concepts, Inc
(800)580-2640

 
 
 

NT vs Novell

Post by Hank Leininge » Sun, 26 Jan 1997 04:00:00




> (RiggsLA) writes:
> >I am the CADD Manager for St. Paul District Corps of Engineers, and
> >we have UNIX, Windows NT, and Novell.  We have far less problems
> >with Windows NT and UNIX than Novell.  I would not recommend
> >Novell, but our IS department thinks it nessessary.
> Sounds like the contrairy to every comment I ever heard from people
> in my environment. What possible problems can there be with Novell?
> It's such a simple, stable and robust file server, I don't think you
> can compare NT with it.  You'll need a PC about twice as big (RAM
> and CPU -wise) to get the same performance on an NT server.
> UNIX, I don't even consider, anymore. Not for a file/print server.
> To messy.

In years past, maybe.  I have yet to see an NFS client package for
Windows that was worthy of carrying my data, so that is indeed out
if your clients are Windows machines.  But Samba, and commercial apps
like it, which allow a UNIX box to export filesystems using SMB, the
"native" windows filesharing protocol, change that drastically.

I certainly agree with your comments about resource requirements of
NT vs. Novell.  Novell definitely has the edge there.  NT has its
plusses as well; in my opinion, it's got a set of strengths and
weaknesses which are almost a mirror-image of those of Novell.  But in
my experience, one can get as good if not better performance from UNIX
on the same server hardware as Novell, never mind NT.  And you can
have better stability than either, better remote (user- and
administrator-)connectivity than either, more scalable hardware
options, and freely available add-on tools to add features which for
the other environments would be considerable extra-cost options,
expensive third-party solutions, or which simply wouldn't be possible.

This newsgroup probably isn't the place for an OS war, so I'll try not
to add any more fuel after this (feel free to challenge me in email or
move this discussion to an *.advocacy group, however).  However I will
close by saying that if your company is large enough or is growing
steadily, think about a UNIX-based server solution (and since a free
UNIX could be serving files from the 486 your secretary just replaced,
maybe you should think about it no matter what).  If done right, it
does work; you'd be surprised how well.  If done right, it does save
you money; you'd be surprised how much.


Senior Systems Integrator
Progressive Computer Concepts, Inc
(800)580-2640

 
 
 

1. NT vs Novell

Our company is going to revamp their network.  We are using
Microstation for Windows and have several DOS Applications.  We have
25 active Microstation users and another 25 that are waiting in the
wings until we get the site license up and running.  We have it
narrowed down to Windows NT and Novell.  I was wondering what network
other firms are using and what comments you may have.

Please email me with your results in addition to positing back to the
newsgroup.

Thanks
Dave Pruznak
Benatec Associates

2. CM11 - Getting device status

3. Networking Autocad-NT Server vs Novell and Nt Client

4. travel mate 4000x

5. Novell vs. NT servers

6. Object creation in Oracle 9i

7. NT vs. Win95/98 & MicroStation 95 vs. SE

8. PPC board FS (UK)

9. NT 4.0 vs NT 3.51

10. Performance of microstation 5 on Alpha/NT vs. Pentium/NT

11. Window NT 3.51 vs NT 4.0

12. Autocad 14/LT97 vs Novell Read Only File Error

13. R.14 DWGs appear Read Only on Novell Server from NT 4 WS