I would not either. But surely you can come up with something better than the fallacious argument that Windows always crashes and Linux never does. I administrate Windows NT/2000 Servers and Linux systems and none of them are known for randomly blowing their brains out. They all have there problems; just yesterday I ran into an issue with gnome-terminal that caused the system to swap so bad I could not log in locally, forget over the network (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=74748) All I was getting was login failed after 60 seconds. What did I do? Power off, power on, nothing else to do. Here's a couple you can use: RedHat, in conjunction with up2date is about a thousand times easier to patch up [just run up2date -fui and reboot on the fairly rare occasion that it is necessary] than Windows. Windows at least comes close when using a third party tool like HFNetChkPro (www.shavlik.com), but it still usually requires a reboot and RedHat/up2date still has them beat for simplicity. Or you can say that at least RedHat does not run around doing everything different than everyone else. For instance when you have Active Directory enabled Windows 2000/2003 creates boat loads of SRV records in DDNS with names like _kerberos._udp.domain and _ldap._tcp.pdc._msdcs.domain. all in the sub domain _msdcs. Unless your willing to screw with your BIND inplementation and hack around the registry in Windows (as an example of the joy http://www.isc.org/ml-archives/bind-users/2000/02/msg00413.html) then congratulations, you've just been locked into using Windows 2000/2003 DNS by virtue of your Active Directory implementation. I had a grunt from IBM here telling me how I could save two Windows server licenses just by changing to Linux/BIND. Yes and the resulting frustation of getting it to work 'properly' will have me in the rubber room by weeks end. Jason Paul Dorneanu wrote: >I wouldn't compare MS with RH... > >Jason wrote: > >>>Anyone notice that the servers are a bit slow but still running and >>> >>> >>responding? >> >>> MS* would be in the middle of it's 10th reboot. >>> >>> >>Really? I started the download of RH9 Disc 1 and Windows Server 2003 off of >>MSDN at nearly the same time today as it was also just released and put up >>for download. I currently have 470 MB of Windows 2003 server and 451 MB of >>RH9 Disc 1... but who's counting... >> >>Jason
