On Wed, 2005-08-03 at 20:28 +0300, Shlomi Fish wrote: > On Wednesday 03 August 2005 18:54, Oron Peled wrote: > > > > BTW: My normal reply is that those people cost more because > > (on the average) they know more. If you'll get a > > *realy good* windows admin -- he also won't work for the > > dirt cheap salaries the low level MS-crowd work for. I'll second that. Good MS admins are not cheaper than Linux ones.
> There are several factors in play here: > > 1. As you said Linux sys-admins, on the average cost more than their > MS-centric counterparts, but on the other hand genreally know more. Please do not compare apples with oranges. Find 2 sysadmins with the same salary level and both considered professionals in their field, and you'll be surprised to find out that MS guy might even cost more. > > 2. It was shown that Linux admins can on average take care of much more > workstations than Windows sys-admins. This is FUD. I know more than one organization where 2-3 *good* MS admins handle several hundred core infrastructure servers spread all over the world (and no, no one else has logon rights on those boxes) > > 3. Low-maintenance X-Terminals may reduce the administration overhead even > further. Similar solutions now exist for Windows, though, even though they > also tend to incur per-user software licensing fees (which are not a big deal > for long-term TCO) So you have just discovered the "thin client" buzz word ? And what does licensing has to do with administration overhead (apart of $$$) ? Moreover, thin clients are far from being ideal solution for most of the cases. > > 4. One of my friend works in a software development house who has an NT > server > farm that needs to have close to 100% uptime and operationality. Needless to > say, they have top-of-the-class admins, and also make use of scripting, the > command line, command automation, etc. a lot. Most NT sys admins don't know > anything about the NT command line, much less about scripting and automation. Welcome to the real world with *real* MS sysadmins. Those who script, automate, write code, know a thing or two about security and the underlying technology. You know... professionals. Please, please, do not tag those other "MCSE wannabes" with "Systems Administrator" title. People that hardly know how to administer couple servers and dozen workstations in my world are hardly called "operators" (and the same stands in Linux world) > > I recall hearing about an incident that a mail server running on an NT (in a > different company) was flooded with messages containing viruses. (all of the > same characterists) The local admin had no idea how to eliminate them. What > they eventually did was copy the mailbox file to a UNIX server, where the > UNIX admin wrote a simple script to filter out the bad E-mail messages, and > after that, they copied the mailbox back to the Windows box. This has nothing to do with the platform. If he knew a thing or two, he could: - filter inbound mail at SMTP level with either VS API or custom event sink. - write a short script which uses MAPI and walk the Exchange store to clean up the existing dirt. - write couple CMD one-liners to clean up the SMTP queues. ================================================================= To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
