Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

How Hard is it to Manage Different Unices?

Posted by Cliff on from the it's-all-about-the-flava dept.

vrmlguy asks: "Where I work has several Unix-based servers, all running the same vendor's OS. We are getting ready to buy another big server, and management wants to get bids from other vendors. However, our staff is only familar with our current vendor's OS. Yes, I know that any two flavors of Unix are more alike than not, and yes, I know about the Rosetta Stone for Unix that makes it easy to transfer skills. I want to know about the down-side: What's the difference in the cost of operations between a mono-culture and a shop running two or more vendors' OSs?"

5 of 372 comments (clear)

  1. Re:it depends on the architecture by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait


    boxen

    You, sir, are a pompous asshole.

  2. Re:It will affect your admins more than users by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait


    boxen

    You, sir, are a very pompous asshole.

  3. Re:It will be CHEAPER in the long run!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait


    boxen

    You, sir, are an extremely pompous asshole.

  4. Re:Easy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    This guy must be an NT tech. Part of the read
    it by the roll crowd. A book has pages - not
    perferated lines, in little square sheets...

  5. Re:What about switching to Linux. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    Fuck you and the Linux horse your rode in on, you stupid Stallman-loving moron.

    Linux is a toy. Service for Linux sucks. Security for Linux is as bad as NT. Linux runs on toy hardware. When you do run linux on good hardware, it can't take advantage of that which makes it good.

    My advice: Get a real UNIX. Don't fuck around with the Linux toy and the h4x0r script-kiddies that use it. If you must use a free UNIX, use OpenBSD. Else, you'll be hacked before you're done booting up!