Sorry this sentence is confusing. Somewhere between me and the final copy, it changed a bit and became less clear.
What I meant to say is that Linuxconf represents, to me, a great administrative tool. It is comprehensive, intuitive, and offers a consistent interface for a variety of functions.
It amazes me that vendors who have been building Unix hardware and writing Unix operating systems for years have yet to come up with something that comes close to Linuxconf. The closest thing to that in this comparison is, in my opinion, SMIT.
Sorry that I didn't communicate this clearly in the article.
While it obviously becomes a bit meaningless on the Web, the space that we ran out of was indeed paper and ink.
Unix is a broad topic. You can't cover it completely in 2500 words. I think that a comparison between Sun/HP/IBM/Compaq/SGI Unix hardware, Intel based Unix, and NT would be a very good, but very different article.
By the way, a Linux comparison (Red Hat/Caldera/SuSE/TurboLinux) runs next week.
Slashdot Mirror
Sorry this sentence is confusing. Somewhere between me and the final copy, it changed a bit and became less clear.
What I meant to say is that Linuxconf represents, to me, a great administrative tool. It is comprehensive, intuitive, and offers a consistent interface for a variety of functions.
It amazes me that vendors who have been building Unix hardware and writing Unix operating systems for years have yet to come up with something that comes close to Linuxconf. The closest thing to that in this comparison is, in my opinion, SMIT.
Sorry that I didn't communicate this clearly in the article.
While it obviously becomes a bit meaningless on the Web, the space that we ran out of was indeed paper and ink.
Unix is a broad topic. You can't cover it completely in 2500 words. I think that a comparison between Sun/HP/IBM/Compaq/SGI Unix hardware, Intel based Unix, and NT would be a very good, but very different article.
By the way, a Linux comparison (Red Hat/Caldera/SuSE/TurboLinux) runs next week.