On 08/23 12:02 -0700, W. Curtis Preston wrote:
> Here's my justification for preferring a UNIX NetBackup server:
> 
> 1. The UNIX system will be able to pull a lot more power (throughput) and 
> drive more tape drives
> 2. A lot of the free tools you see on this list are written in bourne 
> shell, or are in perl
>    but not written for NT.
> 3. It's harder to write scripts for NT even if you know what you're doing.
>    The '\' thing really gets in the way. ;)
> 4. Easier to send mail via the command line. (Yes, I know about BLAT.)
> 5. Cron is MUCH better than NT's AT.
> 
> However:
> 
> 1. The NT Admin GUI is much better than the Java or X GUI.
>    There is real functionality that isn't in either of the other GUIs.
>    However, you can install that GUI on  your NT box that's controlling 
> your Unix master.
> 2. The NT version of NetBackup COSTS less.
> 3. The NT BOX will cost less
> 4. Tru64 != UNIX
>    Veritas ports to and certifies them last.  You will always behind the 
> power curve.
>    If your choice is Tru64 for a master, or W2k as a master, I'd go Win2k.
>    (And buy Aeleen Frisch's book "Win2k Command line.")
> 

points are well taken but I'd have to disagree with "Tru64 != Unix".
The fact that it comes last is something I've grown used to.  With an
application like backups I tend to be very conservated about changes
anyway.

With the change company in direction I also happen to have three large
multiprocessor Alpha boxes with lots of RAM and disk sitting around
not doing much.

How does Netbackup run on an AS/400? <grin>

-- 
Daniel Monjar (mailto:dmonjar AT orgtek DOT com)