Mark,

Lets compare apples with apples and oranges with oranges. What could you 
say in response to that:
"Your sluggish Windows 3.1 even does not have own TCP/IP stack but I do 
have IPSec in AIX 4.3.3"
How many years have passed since Compaq bought DEC and even now HP buys 
Compaq (alright, they "merge").
You love your mice, I love my keyboard 51 times more - 102 keys (I replaced 
the funny kbd with Win keys with an old rock solid PS/2 keyboard) vs 2 
buttons :-)
Even in Windoze It is easier for me to do Alt-Tab several times instead 
of click-here, click-there. But can you manage Windows TCP/IP stack other 
than with a mouse or digging deeply in (a deep shit called) registry
is there somewhere in the world a description of at least 5% of registry 
keys any just-installed Windows system does have. What about the man pages. 
I do not heed to have ability to open Control Panel applets from the help, 
I need information how to proceed when they open.
not only me but many of my colleagues use X only to have more telnet/ssh 
screens. I am very sad that IBM replaced high-function terminal (hft) 
console in AIX 3.x with low-function terminal (lft) console in AIX 4.x and 
later. With hft we were able to have many screens and switch between them 
(even if some are X while other are text)
what would you do to automate the everyday tasks of lets say TSM client 
if you had only GUI or Web client and not dsmc ?!? Windows scripting 
host???
can you say that all Windows management tasks can be performed from 
command line and automated without the tools micro&soft though are enough 
for you. And I have to learn for each new version of windoze where the heck 
now can I perform <task1>, <task2>, etc.
we had to go all the way to Windows XP to reach at the end "secure 
operating system". Have you seen in your life a UNIX with permissions of / 
and /usr set to 777?!?
mom and pap down the street are able to setup Windows in a half hour. 
Later they call somebody called "programmer" in Bulgaria to identify their 
hardware and install that tiny piece of software that would make the sound 
working, video with resolution greater than 640x480 (VGA was introduced in 
IBM PS/2 in 1988, right), make this Internet-connection thingy working, 
etc. And I even had my life an "IT specialist" from a major international 
bank coming to the office of a customer (big internaltional corporation) to 
install e-banking SW, got the response that the modem is external and is on 
the desk and fully cabled, and five minutes later plugged the second phone 
line into Ethernet adapter. The adapter didn't liked too much the idea to 
be a fuse but blown as is expected from a fuse.
you already have experience in the past with X terminals. How much time 
passed to "invent" Windows Terminal Server ? And how many users can run 
lets say Word on a WTS box simultaneously? And how powerful this box ought 
to be?
others already pointed TSM mainly needs I/O resources like bus 
throughput, memory access speed, network performance and even number of 
slots. What can we do with PC box with 2 slots on primary PCI and 4-5 more 
through PCI-PCI bridge. So 133-266 MB/s are shared among disk controller 
(boot), FC adapter (usualy 0 or 2), one or more network adapters. One Gb 
Ethernet and one FC adapters are enough to congest the bus. Only top-end 
Intel-based servers have more than one PCI bus. And I will have to get 
4,8-processor capable system with only one processor to have necessary bus 
performance. Guess also from where Intel servers took the idea memory 
modules to be installed in pairs or quads? I do remember MCA-based RS/6000 
53H which served me fine in 1993 having 128-bit wide memory bus with 41MHz 
processor

Sorry for being so angry. I do recommend to my customers Windows NT/2000 
servers for small shops. I hope we will get TSM server on Linux some day. 
But for any medium-sized or larger enterprise the definitive answer is UNIX 
(or mainframe if you need it *and* can afford it). If you need to backup NT 
fileserver, Exchange server and MS SQL server plus/minus few dozen Windows 
PCs the answer is TSM on Windows. If you have DB2, Informix, Oracle or SAP 
and several hundred GB database better leave the sandbox and put TSM on 
UNIX.
Have you seen a server with 150-300 GB disk space intended to be backed up 
to a DDS3 tape (not autochanger) ?! I did.

Thank you for the patience rading all I wrote.


Zlatko Krastev
IT Consultant







"Remeta, Mark" <MRemeta AT SELIGMANDATA DOT COM> on 17.01.2002 19:03:29
Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU>
To:     ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
cc: 

Subject:        Re: TSM Server on Windows - Does it work?

Well this is not the case Daniel. I do have Unix experience. With Sun's
version of Unix before it became Solaris, SunOS, with SCO Unix, with DEC
Ultrix and another company who's no longer in business Convergent. I don't
remember what they called it. I've used X-Terminals on my desktop before
PC's became vogue. Shoot I even modified DEC's install script to support
third party drives with Ultrix. Windows is everything Unix should be, easy
to use, powerful... I think many so called 'Unix specialists' are just
jealous that mom and pop from down the street can setup Windows in an
afternoon and do everything that the specialists took 3 days to get running
on Unix.