I bought this book at a recent computer show. I found it very interesting, and quite easy to read. In fact, I read straight through it in two days.
It provides a great deal of useful background information about CIFS/SMB/MS networking, in a clear sensible fashion. I learned a great deal about browsing, elections, primary and backup domain servers, etc. Because of this, I would even recommend the book to pure NT admins (poor suckers).
For Samba admins, the book is invaluable. It contains a clear concise, indexed, explaination of every configuration parameter. Several parameters that I didn't understand in Samba's included docs made sense after reading this. The book also has a large number of useful examples.
All of the information in the book could probably be obtained free from the net. However, it would be in pieces from various sources. This book collects and organizes it.
They only look at the workstations, not the infrastructure they require. ``The TCO model does not include any server or dedicated network costs.''
They assume most unix workstation users will also have a NT pc for email, browsing, and office apps. Then added 40% of the cost of a pc to every unix system (hardware, maintenance and support). My work gave me a NT pc and a sun. I put linux on the pc, use it remotely from the sun, and run cool eyecandy screensavers on it's display.
They only looked at commercial Unix hardware: Sun, HP, and SGI. They did not look at any intel based unices. They did not look at Linux, nor any BSD variant.
They based the unix hardware costs on list prices, not the usual corperate discounts.
They claim unix users spend 4.6 hours per week on workstation self-support. I don't give users root access, even on their desktops. There's nothing the users can do to ``support'' the station.
They mention the third party applications needed to manage NT networks, but don't consider the costs.
NT is far less mature than the Unix family, of which Linux is a member. M$ foolishly ignored 30 years of research and accumulated wisdom. As a result, they've been repeating all the old mistakes.
Most of NT (and other M$ code) was written by lower echelon programers, under the direction of computer scientists and managers. Many of them had only recently graduated from MSD training classes. In generaly they were operating under marketing imposed time constraints. This shows in the quality of the product.
If you want proof, try working with the IP routing table metrics under NT, or look at their publicly released code, ie the frontpage extentions for apache. Also look at a security model that requires everyone to buy third party virus scanners.
In contrast, most of Linux was based on an established tradition. Most of the major holes were already known. It was written by people who cared about the quality of their code. They loved programming, and their personal reputations were at stake. Then that code was reviewed publicly, and contributions were fed back to the author.
I forget who said "If I have seen far, it is by standing on the shoulders of giants". M$ forgot it was ever said.
Slashdot Mirror
I bought this book at a recent computer show. I found it very interesting, and quite easy to read. In fact, I read straight through it in two days.
It provides a great deal of useful background information about CIFS/SMB/MS networking, in a clear sensible fashion. I learned a great deal about browsing, elections, primary and backup domain servers, etc. Because of this, I would even recommend the book to pure NT admins (poor suckers).
For Samba admins, the book is invaluable. It contains a clear concise, indexed, explaination of every configuration parameter. Several parameters that I didn't understand in Samba's included docs made sense after reading this. The book also has a large number of useful examples.
All of the information in the book could probably be obtained free from the net. However, it would
be in pieces from various sources. This book collects and organizes it.
I highly recommended this book.
I gave two examples. Someone else says they both involve purchased code, not native MS development. So here's another from a friend of mine:
From the SDK: "Windows 95: MapViewOfFile may require the swapfile to grow. If the swapfile
cannot grow, the function fails."
So, even if I have a file mapped, somehow Windows 95 thinks it needs to page.
Some of MS's applications, ie word and SQL Server, are well done. However their OS, their network protocols, and their server code are terrible.
They only look at the workstations, not the infrastructure they require. ``The TCO model does not include any server or dedicated network costs.''
They assume most unix workstation users will also have a NT pc for email, browsing, and office apps. Then added 40% of the cost of a pc to every unix system (hardware, maintenance and support). My work gave me a NT pc and a sun. I put linux on the pc, use it remotely from the sun, and run cool eyecandy screensavers on it's display.
They only looked at commercial Unix hardware: Sun, HP, and SGI. They did not look at any intel based unices. They did not look at Linux, nor any BSD variant.
They based the unix hardware costs on list prices, not the usual corperate discounts.
They claim unix users spend 4.6 hours per week on workstation self-support. I don't give users root access, even on their desktops. There's nothing the users can do to ``support'' the station.
They mention the third party applications needed to manage NT networks, but don't consider the costs.
NT is far less mature than the Unix family, of which Linux is a member. M$ foolishly ignored 30 years of research and accumulated wisdom. As a result, they've been repeating all the old mistakes.
Most of NT (and other M$ code) was written by lower echelon programers, under the direction of computer scientists and managers. Many of them had only recently graduated from MSD training classes. In generaly they were operating under marketing imposed time constraints. This shows in the quality of the product.
If you want proof, try working with the IP routing table metrics under NT, or look at their publicly released code, ie the frontpage extentions for apache. Also look at a security model that requires everyone to buy third party virus scanners.
In contrast, most of Linux was based on an established tradition. Most of the major holes were already known. It was written by people who cared about the quality of their code. They loved programming, and their personal reputations were at stake. Then that code was reviewed publicly, and contributions were fed back to the author.
I forget who said "If I have seen far, it is by standing on the shoulders of giants". M$ forgot it was ever said.