From: Adam Skutt (askuttwnec.edu)
Date: Mon Feb 07 2005 - 11:52:03 CST

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Adam wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 06, 2005 at 04:06:49PM -0500, Hanford, Seth wrote:
>
>>Troll.
>
>
> It works better if you don't announce it before you do it.
Same to you.
Except in your case, you look extra dumb, because it's explict (rather
than implict) hypocrisy.

> ISA server is a firewall, and running your firewall and
> everything else on the same machine is a good idea.
It's not like you actually have to do that. Wow, if you didn't realise
ISA can be run on a different box, then you really need to not talk
about things you don't know about.

SBS is a way for small buisness to get a host of MS products commonly
used on a server together in a single bundle to be used in small scale
setups.
Where even if they were using Windows, they'd probably be using one box
anyway.

I don't think MS necessarily intends for them to run everything provided
in SBS on a single box (even if they only license it that way).

>>There's an operating system for every purpose. Of course this is the
>>OpenBSD list, but when you start by knocking 2 perfectly suited OSes for
>>this task (Windows and Debian) one begins to wonder if any OS, even OpenBSD,
>>will suit you.
>
>
> If they were perfectly suited he would be using them.
Not necessarily. Some people have biases that make them ignore better
or equivalent choices. Some people also don't understand how to
properly weigh cost/benefits in a corporate enviroment (here's a little
hint: the technical factors don't matter at all, or matter very little).

Adam Skutt

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]