[lug] OT: netware

[George Sexton]

>> It was about as temperamental as a hammer.

This is true and false. 3.10 and 3.11 could be a major pain if you had a
flaky driver. You would just get abends out of the blue.

Also, from a design standpoint the NLMs or NetWare Loadable Modules ran
in Ring 0 of the kernel, so a bad piece of code from a vendor could take
out the server. I think to some extent part of what hurt Novell was the
fact that they relied on 3rd party drivers, and let 3rd party software
de-stabilize the OS. 

On the other hand, even back in the 96-98 time frame I was routinely
having uptimes of 15 months on commodity hardware.

-----Original Message-----
From: lug-bounces at lug.boulder.co.us
[mailto:lug-bounces at lug.boulder.co.us] On Behalf Of Tony Dyson
Sent: Friday, February 27, 2004 6:33 AM
To: Boulder (Colorado) Linux Users Group -- General Mailing List
Subject: Re: [lug] OT: netware


I've thought for a while that Novell's biggest "mistake" was making 3.11

& 3.12 so good that many of their users had no reason to upgrade. It was

about as temperamental as a hammer.

Five years ago I worked in a shop with Novell LAN servers & an HP 9000 
for the "big" database. They all ran like clocks. Then we got a new IT 
Director who wanted everything moved onto Windows. I knew it was time to

leave ;-)

Nate Duehr wrote:
> On Feb 27, 2004, at 12:51 AM, Zan Lynx wrote:
> 
> Netware 3 and 4 (they're far beyond this now) were probably also the 
> single most stable network OS's I've ever worked on.  Far ahead of its

> time many years ago, there are still deployments of Netware hidden
here 
> and there at many companies.
> 
_______________________________________________
Web Page:  http://lug.boulder.co.us
Mailing List: http://lists.lug.boulder.co.us/mailman/listinfo/lug
Join us on IRC: lug.boulder.co.us port=6667 channel=#colug