No, I am *definitely* not too blue to pay attention to other products. I
don't know about NetWork Systems' product, but I did a paper analysis of
Harbor (New Era), Upstream (Enterprise Data, but now Innovation), and
ADSM (IBM). I then selected two products for evaluation, Upstream and
ADSM. I evaluated both for 60 days. I didn't evaluate Harbor because, at
least at the time, they could not back up directly to tape, a feature I
wanted. I also wasn't inclined to like ADSM because I was concerned about
"buggy-ness", especially in a first release. At least the other products
had been out for a while.
As it turned out, I was pleasantly surprised by ADSM, while I was not
at all impressed with Upstream. Hence our choice.
I also tried to qualify my statement somewhat, but I guess I was a little
too subtle or vague. I said "in my shop" it had no peer. What I was driving
at was that for our particular situation, I knew of nothing that worked
better. While I recognize that Harbor, Upstream, and other products may
have made great strides, I am not inclined to switch gears unless there
is a compelling reason to do so. But I am aware that it might not be the
solution for all shops.
I like MS bashing? Just because I don't consider Windows 3.1 or 95 to be
industrial-strength operating systems/environments? I like to think I'm
a little more open-minded than that. You've jumped to the wrong conclusion.
I like their applications products (I use MS Office
and know of no better suite), but Windows 95 leaves a lot to be desired.
And yes, I have tried it so I know of what I speak.
Andy Raibeck
Connecticut Mutual
//--- forwarded letter -------------------------------------------------------
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Date: Mon, 07 Aug 95 15:02:47 -0500
> From: "Jeff Koeberl" <koeberl AT execpc DOT com>
> To: "Andrew Raibeck" <raibeck AT ibm DOT net>
> Subject: Re: Windows-95
>
> ADSM has no peer? I hope the fact that you are on IBM.NET, run ADSM and
> like MS bashing doesn't mean you are too blue to pay attention to the
> products available on the market today for distributed backup... ADSM
> has its good points, but Network Systems, New Era and Innovation (to name
> a few) have products which rival ADSM. I'm very familiar with ADSM and
> CAM from Network Systems and I can tell you that for disaster recovery
> and transfer rates ADSM cannot compete with CAM. 8) As you said,
> "quantity does not equal quality", so just because IBM has more ADSM
> licenses does not mean that its product has no peer...
>
> On Mon, 7 Aug 1995, Andrew Raibeck wrote:
>
> > Wayne said,
> >
> > >
> > > Paul said,
> > > > We are working on a Win-95 client. No dates available yet. Our typical
> > > > target is to support major new platforms within 6 months of their
> > > > general
> > > > availability so that should give you a rough estimate.
> > >
> > > For a premier backup system and premier operating system, about 6
> > > months before your current goal would seem more appropriate! I won't
> > > venture to guess whether ADSM and Win95 qualify :-)
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > Wayne T. Smith
> > > Systems Group -- CAPS internet: wts AT maine.maine DOT edu
> > > University of Maine System BITNET/CREN: WTS@MAINE
> > >
> >
> > ADSM has demonstrated in our shop that it is, without a doubt, a premier
> > backup system with no peer. As to whether Win95 is a premier operating
> > system? I'm not even convinced that it is a true operating system, any
> > more than Win 3.1 is. As to premier? I don't think so. I bet MS sells a
> > lot of copies, but quantity does not equal quality. (:>
> >
> > But seriously, I personally would rather have IBM work on enhancements to
> > the existing product rather than work on a client for a product that isn't
> > even in production release yet, and probably won't/shouldn't be in
> > production in big shops for a while yet.
> >
> > By the way, the regular Windows 3.1 client will work just fine in Win 95.
> > It might not be able to back up everything (like the registry?), but it
> > should be able to back up data. Just make sure you use the FAT file system
> > with 8.3 file names.
> >
> > Andy Raibeck
> > Connecticut Mutual
> > (203) 987-3521
> >
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Jeffery V. Koeberl koeberl AT earth.execpc DOT
> com
> Senior Systems Analyst (414)299-4637
> Northwestern Mutual Life Ins. Co Live to improve.
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
|
