my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Community   » Film-Yak   » Downtime and new servers (Page 4)

This topic comprises 4 pages: 1  2  3  4

Author Topic: Downtime and new servers Rachel Craven Madam Moderator Posts: 2190 From: Pensacola, FL Registered: Dec 2000 posted 06-01-2003 07:22 PM                     I luuuuuvvvvvv yooouuuuu tooooooo! Well, go ahead then Phil!  |  IP: Logged John Hawkinson Film God Posts: 2273 From: Cambridge, MA, USA Registered: Feb 2002 posted 06-01-2003 07:35 PM                     Of course I run Unix servers, Brad. I'm sure there are others here, too [maybe Evans?] As for vi -- it's hard to fathom this as your breaking point with Unix. The traditional Unix rivalry is between vi and Emacs. Certainly I use Emacs far more than vi (though I do use vi on occasion), and it's far and away more advanced and superior. If you haven't used emacs, you haven't lived --jhawk  |  IP: Logged Daryl C. W. O'Shea Film God Posts: 3977 From: Midland Ontario Canada (where Panavision & IMAX lenses come from) Registered: Jun 2002 posted 06-01-2003 11:23 PM                        Emacs. I use UNIX too but I really don't like playing around too much with servers other people set up. Now if only somebody would donate ANY (working or not) DTS processor that we could run Novell on for a chat server, I'd be one happy guy.  |  IP: Logged Matt Hale Expert Film Handler Posts: 123 From: Vancouver, Canada Registered: Dec 2002 posted 06-01-2003 11:42 PM                        my file server runs a BSD-derivative and has been rock solid. A couple of video servers I used to run were NT4 based, and they were not bad - about 4 weeks between reboots was the record, but thats because I had stripped out most of the non-essential components. As to Vi, its fine for hacking config files but I wouldnt want to write War and Peace on it. I'd use WordStar for CP/M for that.  |  IP: Logged Scott Norwood Film God Posts: 8146 From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas) Registered: Jun 99 posted 06-02-2003 12:19 AM                        Emacs? Ha! ed is the standard text editor !  |  IP: Logged Brad Miller Administrator Posts: 17775 From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall) Registered: May 99 posted 06-02-2003 02:12 AM                     Yes John, VI was the breaking point for me. I guess you now make 2 people that I know of who actually like that stupid thing.  |  IP: Logged David Stambaugh Film God Posts: 4021 From: Eugene, Oregon Registered: Jan 2002 posted 06-02-2003 11:49 AM                        In all seriousness, I'd much rather run a Novell server farm than any other OS, at least for core file & print services. It works, it's flexible, things aren't hidden behind layers of obfuscation. Having said that, my experience with NT4 (SP6A) and Windows 2000 Server is they are extremely stable. I'm learning Linux, am impressed in some ways and not so impressed in others.  |  IP: Logged Daryl C. W. O'Shea Film God Posts: 3977 From: Midland Ontario Canada (where Panavision & IMAX lenses come from) Registered: Jun 2002 posted 06-02-2003 12:34 PM                        I totally agree Dave. Novell is my first choice for any mid to large scale network. ZenWorks makes life so easy. Of course you also get to run on top of DR. DOS! What more can you ask for!?  |  IP: Logged Scott Norwood Film God Posts: 8146 From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas) Registered: Jun 99 posted 06-02-2003 05:07 PM                        The last time I touched Novell was around the time of the transition from 3.x to 4.x. I will give them credit for having a stable product for simple file service and for having the most robust print queueing service that I have ever dealt with. I think I remember only one time when a busy print queue got itself wedged. By comprison, Unix's lpd blows goats (though Solaris's lp seems to have gotten significantly better starting with 2.8). Though printing on Windows NT (2000, etc.) is even worse. Now, though, I think that Samba on Unix (preferably Solaris) would be my choice for file service to Win32 machines in a medium-size network if something like a Network Appliance box with a CIFS license is out of the question. Being a proprietary, single-vendor product, I'm not really sure where Novell's file and print service software fits in the current marketplace.  |  IP: Logged David Stambaugh Film God Posts: 4021 From: Eugene, Oregon Registered: Jan 2002 posted 06-02-2003 08:20 PM                        I never ran DR-DOS on my Novell servers. Always MS-DOS, v6.22 if possible, never had a problem with it. Novell Directory Services is WAY more admin-friendly than Active Directory - give me NDS any day. The ability to load and unload server NLMs on-the-fly most of the time means very rarely having to reboot when upgrading drivers etc. If I do lose a volume due to hardware failure, I'd sure as hell rather restore a NetWare volume from scratch than Windows. NetWare rocks for core file & print services. I actually miss working with it.  |  IP: Logged Mark J. Marshall Film God Posts: 3188 From: New Castle, DE, USA Registered: Aug 2002 posted 06-02-2003 08:48 PM                    Yay Novell! We have about 25 Novell servers here. The only problems that crop up are hardware related. We also have about 5 Linux servers here running web/mysql stuff. Same deal. We have one Windows 2000 server who's only job in life is to look at incoming email for viruses and spam and such, and we have to reboot it about once a month... just because. Brad, I hope you worked an automated monthly reboot into the system! For the rest of you Novell / Linux geeks out there, you will be interested to know that Netware 7.x will be geared towards Linux in a major way. Click Here  |  IP: Logged John Hawkinson Film God Posts: 2273 From: Cambridge, MA, USA Registered: Feb 2002 posted 06-02-2003 11:06 PM                     Well, Brad, if you haven't tried Emacs, you should seriously do so. You can even try it out under Windows if you really want to; get it from ftp.gnu.org. Yes, Scott, we all know ed is the standard text editor. It's a somewhat specialized meaning of standard, kind of like "lowest common denominator." Do you know anyone who uses ed for any serious tasks other than cripped single user mode work? I think I'll go back to TECO... --jhawk  |  IP: Logged Mark J. Marshall Film God Posts: 3188 From: New Castle, DE, USA Registered: Aug 2002 posted 06-03-2003 08:29 AM                    quote: I could operate a mouse with my foot and still get the job done twice as fast. Something about that just seems surreal.  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 4 pages: 1  2  3  4

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.