I can give you some insights, and use Solaris 10 as an example.
During the beta for Solaris 10, and ZFS, a beta kit would be available to
the NetWorker development team. However, during beta, things will change and
so they have to re-engineer. So, the choice comes down to, does engineering
spend a lot of resource on something that only a few people will use
initially, or do they spend that resource on other features that more
customers want?
Now, something like Vista, they know, will be used by loads of people. Even
the beta is big. So, they tend to work with that, but only the later RC's
(This is what they've done in the past). I don't know if there is a version
that works with vista at the moment.
However, I see no excuse for MAC OSX in Intel. As far as I know it is just a
recompile. And then, why the hell don't they release a FreeBSD version, as
that is the basis for OSX?
Siobhan
(used to be a Legato Product Manager)
On 12/12/06 9:45 AM, "Tim Mooney" <Tim.Mooney AT NDSU DOT EDU> wrote:
> In regard to: Re: [Networker] NetWorker on Intel-based Mac, David Johnson..:
>
>> Don't you love documentation that tells you exactly which file systems
>> it supports and how much disk space it needs but omits to point out
>> that it doesn't run on any hardware currently produced that bears the
>> "Mac" label? And to have an installer that claims to start the daemon
>> but doesn't say anything when it immediately crashes just adds icing
>> to the cake!
>>
>> This was the straw that broke the camels back and launched me on my
>> current search for a replacement for Networker...
>
> You've touched on one of my pet peeves about many application vendors.
>
> Why do we have to wait 6-24 months after an OS or OS update releases
> before applications support the OS or new features in the update? I
> absolutely understand that it takes time to "qualify" an application as
> supported, but shouldn't that be happening *before* the new OS is
> generally available to the world?
>
> ZFS support (mentioned in another thread today) is another perfect
> example. Sun's been touting ZFS as the filesystem to end all filesystems
> for well over a year, and it's been shipping since June. So why did
> EMC add NetWorker support for it only in 7.3.2? Why wasn't it supported
> by NetWorker the same day (or the same week, or the same month) it was
> available to customers?
>
> Anyone know if any current NetWorker product supports Microsoft Vista?
> Microsoft has had preview releases available for months...
>
> I could go on, but you get the point. EMC isn't alone in this regard,
> sadly. Don't even get me started on Blackboard (LMS) or Oracle...
>
> Tim
Siobhán
To sign off this list, send email to listserv AT listserv.temple DOT edu and
type "signoff networker" in the body of the email. Please write to
networker-request AT listserv.temple DOT edu if you have any problems with this
list. You can access the archives at
http://listserv.temple.edu/archives/networker.html or
via RSS at http://listserv.temple.edu/cgi-bin/wa?RSS&L=NETWORKER
|
