Subject: Re: netatalk comps (and alternatives in SAMBA)
From: Harry Zink/Netatalk List (netatalk@fizbin.com)
Date: Mon Jul 24 2000 - 11:25:52 EDT
on 7/23/00 10:11 PM, Marcus Radich at marcus@darena.co.nz wrote:
> True enough, but you need *major firepower* to run NT at a decent
> speed. Talk about a GHz PC with 256MB of RAM just to boot!!
> <exaggerated, but not far wrong>. You are forgetting this cost.
I have some installations that are running 30 Macs off a 133 MHz Pentium box
and it's providing decent speed under AppleTalk (corporate client of mine
that won't touch anything but NT, unfortunately - we're working to migrate
that installation to an ASIP server, though).
Furthermore, I have buddies running Win2000 on 300MHz boxes, and using them
as servers, proxy boxes, and other tasks simultaneously.
Like I said, I am *NOT* a friend of Microsoft products, but at least I don't
senselessly make up 'requirements' that are not true (Mind you, there still
are plenty of problems with Win products, but their AppleTalk support is not
one of them)
Furthermore, most installations nowadays use equipment better than a 386
(meaning that most new, CHEAP PCs run at 400MHz and better, which is plenty
for a server).
> The NT approach? Get another server for Proxy, another for Web Dev,
> another for Exchange Server...boy, THIS adds up! I'd say you are up
> for a bit more than the quoted $150...
I could argue likewise by creating situations that require extra hardware
that Linux can't provide - I'm talking realistic situations -- and these
involve the use of dedicated servers for workgroups, since proxy servers are
already present in the installation.
Besides, if you are making the argument for a dev server, THOSE I would run
on Linux boxes only, but THOSE *CAN* run on 486 boxes without any hassles...
Even If I did have to purchase a separate box just for appletalk serving,
I'd rather spend an extra $600 on a PC, and $150 on the software, instead of
sitting around having to worry that my artist's data might get lost or
corrupted, or having to send support personel to explain, over and over, why
alias' don't work. 5-6 support calls, and you're starting to exceed the cost
of the extra hardware...
Of course, a semi-elegant alternative would be to run SAMBA on the Linux
box, and to install a utility like DAVE on the Macs - which allows you to
see and use SMB shares on the Mac. Not extremely elegant, because it
installs NetBUI on the Macs, but decent solution as well.
Harry
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Wed Jan 17 2001 - 14:31:35 EST