🚀 go-pugleaf

[PJ <kyang@asiaonline.net>]
> We use Windows95 to dial-up our ISPs and then make an connection
> (PPP) to the UNIX server in the ISP, right?  So, why always UNIX??
> Not NT 4.0 server? Can NT handle this job? if yes, why not ISP use NT
> instead?

1. Are you trolling?  The rest of this post assumes you're asking an
   honest question....

2. Well -- why WOULD you want to use NT 4.0 instead?  I sure wouldn't.

3. To clarify the above: Yes, NT can handle this job.

   If you pay Microsoft a lot of money for the right software and for
   enough licenses, and you don't mind the licensing terms (example:
   you don't get to buy your choice of web server software -- the NT
   Server license forces you to run Microsoft IIS).

   If you pay your hardware vendors a lot of money to get faster
   computers, to make up for the relatively high CPU and memory
   overhead for running NT.

   If you pay your tech support people enough money to handle things
   like adding user accounts in NT, since those kinds of things are
   a lot harder to automate than in Unix.

   If you don't want to do things like DNS hosting.

   If you don't mind always having to sit in front of a server to
   operate it, rather than taking advantage of Unix's facilities to let
   you operate any server from anywhere.

   If security isn't an issue for you.

   If you have the kinds of users that won't complain about occasional
   server crashes.  (Then again, if the clients are all using Win95,
   they'll probably be pretty forgiving.)

The point is, NT is a vastly inferior product for hosting an ISP (and
for about anything else I can think of, but I won't go there).  And
most ISP's know this.

-- 
Peter Samuelson
<sampo.creighton.edu ! psamuels>