481. Rajesh
January 21, 1999
dhanwada@cs.uakron.edu
Unix way to go

480. Sandeep Desai
January 21, 1999
sbdesai@yahoo.com
Linux, no contest!

479. Melwyn
January 21, 1999
melsil@excite.com
Windows NT will be supreme because of Microsoft's financial & technological backing...

478. Venkat
January 21, 1999
cvenkat@bitsmart.com
FreeBSD!!
A better Unix than Linux.
FreeBSD is renowned for its sustained performance under very heavy loads - ideal for ISPs. Free, just like Linux. Runs on Intel platforms, just like Linux.
(WinNT doesn't even count.) 

477. Ravi Hegde
January 21, 1999
LinuxExpert@yahoo.com
It should be LINUX if not, at least Unix (may be any flavor). Why? You look from any point of view, Linux (or Unix) is going to win the battle. One of the very important things to see is security. When it comes to security, Linux wins. Being an operating system of hackers (remember it, hackers are different from crackers), we do not give any body else to crack into our OS. We hack first, and plug any loopholes before others get a chance to finger point at us. Since millions of us are hacking into Linux, chances of a security hole are very less, far less than that NT. We do not work for money. We look at Linux with pride. So, it gets the utmost care and attention possible by any one. Another very important thing is the money involved in other OS. I can buy a decent system for less than Rs.50,000. Then I have to pour more than that for software, which is ridiculous. I believe in the "Free software - paid services" principle. If I need support, I shall pay, otherwise not. Things should be as simple as that.
In short, Linux - Number One.
Unix - Next choice.
NT - You should be crazy, you will repent later.

476. Praveen
January 21, 1999
n_praveen@hotmail.com
Hello,
I think ISP's should choose Linux as their platform, Because it's free, it's stable and easy maintanence. If you are thinking of service providers then go for Red Hat. The initial cost of setup is quite low as the software expenditure is zero if ISPs chooses Linux. I think it's a good choice to go for Linux.
Bye

475. Ranen Chatterjee
January 21, 1999
ranenc@qualcomm.com
Linux

474. Brahm Astra
January 21, 1999
brahmastra@rediff.net
Linux is the choice....
Linux could prove to be both boon and bane to Intel. The primary reason Intel needs Linux is Windows. Intel keeps making computers faster, more scalable, and more affordable. As Intel computing power has increased, the price of Intel chips has decreased. That makes Intel-based computers increasingly competitive with higher-priced RISC boxes. The problem for Intel is that Microsoft keeps making Windows fatter, slower, buggier, and more expensive. That means Wintel-based computing is less competitive with higher-priced RISC architectures than it should be. Enter Linux. Linux offers the speed, stability, and scalability that is lacking in Windows NT. It has a remarkable level of compatibility. (It offers NT file and print services, Novell Directory Services, etc.) And it does all of this at a rock-bottom price.
That's why Intel loves Linux. Linux does a better job than Windows at elevating Intel computing into a more competitive position with higher-priced RISC workstations. The problem for Intel is that Linux also runs on these alternative RISC systems and more. It runs on Sparc, the Alpha, StrongARM, Macintosh -- heck, it even runs on a PalmPilot. Any vote for Linux promotes an OS that is essentially platform agnostic.
That doesn't automatically constitute a threat for Intel, though. Whether or not Linux eventually spells trouble for Intel depends on a phenomenon, I will call "the threshold of fear." The threshold of fear is the dividing line between two kinds of IT customers -- those who find the best solution for a business problem, and those who redefine the business problem to fit their most familiar frame of reference.
The most familiar frame of reference for IT departments that grew up on PC hardware is Intel. Anything outside Intel is located (along with other mysterious systems, such as Unix and MVS) on the uncharted part of the map that says, "Here be dragons."
Those IT departments that grew out of a heterogeneous mixture of hardware and software platforms have a higher threshold of fear. Their map is much bigger, and they are less intimidated by uncharted territory. If the best solution is an AS/400 and they don't have anyone on board with AS/400 expertise, they hire a cartographer.
By the way, it is this very same threshold of fear that explains why Windows NT never amounted to much on MIPS, Alpha, and the PowerPC. Customers who were familiar with alternative architectures to Intel had developed a high enough threshold of fear that they were not intimidated by the operating systems native to these platforms. To put it bluntly, most people who knew their way around established RISC systems knew enough not to run NT on them.
The threshold of fear leads me to speculate on at least two possible futures for Linux and Intel. Linux may simply invade the space below the threshold of fear. This is likely to happen if we see continued Windows 2000 delays, or if it ships and doesn't meet expectations. In that case, Linux may replace Windows as the safe choice on Intel. I will call that the Lintel future.
On the other hand, there is the remote possibility that continued success for Linux will raise the threshold of fear. In this future, Linux is successful, but fewer people are intimidated by non-Lintel platforms than they were by non-Wintel platforms. If this is the way things turn out, Intel will need to come up with some compelling reasons why its architecture is preferable to the cleaner, more scalable RISC architectures.

473. Abhinav
January 21, 1999
avora@cs.cs.rmit.edu.au
I would bet my money on Windows NT, not version 4, but the upcoming one, the 5th version, but I would certainly not want it to be the absolute winner as that may prove to Microsoft what they already believe (That is that they can control the IT world)

472. Srin P
January 21, 1999
param@hotmail.com
Linux will win. And deserves to win. Hotmail runs on Unix servers as far as I know. They tried to port to NT and failed.

471. RAJAGOPALAN.A
January 21, 1999
rajagopalana@rediffmail.com
Hi,
Windows NT is the best. Windows NT is much more user friendly than any of the above. I know that Linux is very good and also the same holds true with Unix but Windows NT is the best

470. Naveen kumar
January 21, 1999
ngonela@hotmail.com
Linux (now & forever)

Post  Upload your opinion

Pages  35 34 33 32 31 More>>