RE: iSeries more stable than NT? Who says?

This is a multipart message in MIME format.
--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
To answer your questions:

Why can't a server be added to a LAN with every expectation that it will
not take over all the rest of the servers?  Are you worried that V5R3
might take over all the Windows servers on the LAN? Of course not. That'd
be outrageous.  It'd be just as outrageous if it just took over all of the
other OS400 operating systems it could find.

Am I to understand from you that Win2K servers are so complex and
confusing that a shop that has run Windows products in all configurations
for 10+ years is not capable of installing a Win2K server and that an
outside vendor must be brought in?   Surely you jest.

The viruses that have been plaguing the site are Windows-specific.   Win2K
is just the newest victim.  Win2K is no more virus resistant than any of
the rest of their LAN. All their Windows servers and desktops are being
infected routinely and repeatedly.

The clock is being badly set on the non-win2K desktops. The Win2K desktops
work just fine.

The address book requirements for the Microsoft mail services is complex
and not very well defined, so far as we can find (and we've asked the
experts).  Add in the inability to provide normal e-mail service features
that have been available since ELM and PINE;  Well, its discouraging to
the users that expect to have at least basic functionality.

When you talk about V4R5 and V5R1 you are speaking about the same
operating system with a fairly responsible trail of feature and function.
We do not go from V4R5 to V7R3 with nothing in between.  (interim fixes
and patches are always temporarily applied and easily backed out for
OS400, though, right?)

It is not a matter of horse and cart unless you are suggesting that
everyone should know that Win2K can not be installed succesfully by mere
employees, and must be installed by $150+/hour specialists on to virgin
hardware.

The customer now understands that Win2K is really about consolidating the 
Windows
franchise and is a first step in "embrace, extend, exterminate" for the
internet.  There is no new feature or function in Win2k that serves any
other purpose.

Your statement that Win2K is as complex as any other server operating
system certainly has my agreement. I'd even agree that is more complex
than most.

I would add into this that the budget for IS people is a consideration.
This is a LAN of about 200 desktops, an active web presence, and an
ISeries machine.  Big enough to justify an IS staff, too small to have
intense specialization within the department.

------------------------------------------------
Booth Martin
Booth@MartinVT.com
http://www.MartinVT.com
-----------------------------------------------
Booth,

0) I've used "you" several times below. That is just because it's easy,
these remarks aren't necessarily directed toward you.

1) Never, _Never_, NEVER install software on a production lan as a
"learning
experience." That is what a test lab is for.

2) If they can't explain why the clock on several desktops (probably W2K
Pro) had their time reset then they shouldn't be installing W2K servers.
Time is an integral component in the Kerberos security protocol. W2K
servers
act as NTP servers to W2K clients resetting the clock to match the
controlling NTP server, which itself probably looks to an external NTP
server such as tick.usno.navy.mil.

3) A change in the network OS won't make viruses happen more often --
unless
your virus checking software doesn't work on that OS. And you should know
that by testing before deploying.

4) Installing W2K has increased the upkeep on your list server? Why? More
people subscribing and unsubscribing now that you are on W2K

5) I've never seen uninstalling an OS as an option. Did I miss a screen on
the GO LICPGM screen that says "Uninstall V5R1 and return to V4R5"????

6) NOW they have hired a firm specializing in windows? Um, does the horse
and the cart ring a bell? Or perhaps the barn door and the cow?

7) Does this client understand that Windows servers are servers first and
windows second. W2K is NOT NOT NOT a big version of windows 9x/ME. It's a
server operating system and it's as damn complex as any other.