[WinMac] Re: Film Bureau and Platforms

Aaron Ciesar(aciesar[at]stroke.upmc.edu)
Wed, 22 Sep 1999 15:18:34 -0400

Daniel,

I have responded inline and clipped extraneous text.

----------
>From: "Daniel L. Schwartz" <expresso@snip.net>
>To: "The Windows-MacOS cooperation list" <winmac@xerxes.frit.utexas.edu>
>Subject: Re: Film Bureau and Platforms
>Date: Wed, Sep 22, 1999, 10:55 AM
>
>
> Aaron,
>
> I'll thread my responses inline. But, keep in mind that this is for a
> (prepress) service bureau, with sustained file transfer speed and large
> file management & storage the ultimate considerations...
>
> At 10:17 AM 9/22/99 -0400, my neighbor Aaron Ciesar wrote:
>>Rod,
>>
>>I would go with ASIP (AppleShare IP) 6.2 based on your small network size
>>and your Mac/PC ratio.
>
> The Mac-to-PC ratio isn't important: The server (and clients) need to be
> completely cross-platform. This is due not only whether the desired app is
> Mac-only or win-only, but also because they will be receiving customer files.

True.

>>Avoid Novell NetWare like the plague. While NetWare is great for Windows,
>>the Mac implementation is crap and reliant upon a third party source
>>(Prosoft) for the client.
>
> Agreed 100% :)
>
>>MacOS X Server, is a very powerful solution, perhaps overkill. MacOS X
>>Server is very stable and very fast for Web serving. However, ASIP 6.2 is
>>faster at file serving than MacOS X Server. If you like a Unix environment,
>>go with MacOS X Server.
>
> And it has to ride on cheesey hardware. Have fun unpacking your brand new
> G4 if you forget to lift it out of the box by the handles.
> <http://www.macintouch.com>

If unpacking becomes an issue in the choice of server platforms, then the
whole concept of advocacy has just sunk to a new low. Although the report
of the cracked case in pathetically funny.

>>WinNT Server is great for an all PC environment, and its Mac implementation
>>is much better than NetWare. However, NT is much slower than ASIP for
>>serving Mac files (NT used AppleTalk, ASIP uses TCP/IP).
>
> Yes, it is slower, but this is due to using AppleTalk instead of IP with
> its smaller packet size (hence greater packet overhead). Windows NT5, err
> Windows 2000 Server directly supports ASIP emulation, and even the free
> beta is quite stable - I'm running beta 3 here at home, yet RC2 is already
> shipping. Just keep it simple - A mantra that applies to *any* small
> departmental server.

For the sake of simplicity, I kept my opinions to currently shipping
products. I know that WinNT 2000 Server will support AppleShare over IP,
but it is still in development and thus I excluded it.

>>Now you can add
>>third party software MacServer IP from (I have forgotten who makes it) that
>>will allow NT to server Mac files over TCP/IP. However, this will solution
>>is very expensive. If you are not familiar with setting up NT, go with
>>ASIP.
>
> ExtremeZ-IP is available from Intergraph <http://www.intergraph.com>, and
> MacServerIP is available in the US from TeamASA <http://www.TeamASA.com>,
> and is published by Cyan in Germany [<http://www.cyan.de> or
> <http://www.cyansoft.de> - I forget which.]
>
> DISCLAIMER: I am a distributor for TeamASA
>
>>As far as stability goes MacOS X Server will be the most stable, followed by
>>NetWare, then NT, finally ASIP. You should note that a properly configured
>>ASIP server can go months without rebooting.
>
> I question your assertion that NetWare is more stable than NT, especially
> when looking at the end-to-end (server AND client) stability. I would put
> NetWare at the bottom of the trash heap because of needing to use extra
> extensions & control panels on the Macs, which will make the already-shaky
> MacOS even less stable.

I should clarify myself. For severing Macs, NT is way more stable than
NetWare. I completely agree with you on that point. I should have wrote in
an all Windows environment, NetWare is more stable than NT.

>>My FileMaker Pro Server 3.0 on MacOS 8.6 has an uptime of 10 months.
>
> And I have a customer that has run FMPro 3.0 on a Quadra 700 riding on top
> of AppleShare Server 4.0.1 and System 7.5.1 with Retrospect 3.0a backing up
> nightly to an NT server for over 2 years now with never a crash...

You know, if I could only stop tweaking and upgrading my servers, I could
have some truly impressive uptimes.

>>My ASIP 6.2.1 email server with Quick DNS Pro (secondary), Now up to Date,
>>QuickMail Central Directory Server (LDAP)for MacOS has an uptime of 6
>>months. My ASIP 6.2 web, print, and file server with Quick DNS Pro
>>(primary) has been up for a month now (I am constantly tweaking this one
>>hence the short uptime).
>
> OK, what are you running them on, and which MacOS - 8.5.1?

I use MacOS 8.6 on all my systems. However, I do not use the standard
installation. I custom strip the servers of many unneeded extensions and
control panels.

>>For compatibility, ASIP wins hands down, no questions asked. It is the
>>fastest to setup, I did my whole network in 8 hours. It is by far the
>>easiest to setup, and it has excellent stability and performance.
>
> I disagree: For compatibility, NT/Server wins hands down. No additional
> software is needed for either the Mac or any Windows box connected to it.
> Besides, for a small LAN (which this service bureau has) NetBEUI is even
> faster than IP for PC-server transfers.

I should point out that there is no additional software required for a
connecting a PC or a Mac to and ASIP Server.

NetBEUI may be faster than TCP/IP for file transfer, but the Macs do not
support NetBEUI natively. To use NetBEUI, Dave 2.1 would have to be
purchased from Thursby Systems <http://www.thursby.com/>.

Dave is sweet software, but it also decreases the stability of the Macs.
Plus, at $150 per copy, it is a very expensive solution.

The use of NT in a small, cross-platform environment is significantly more
expensive than ASIP. ASIP is ideal for these networks.

> Lastly, I still stand by my assertion that a PCI hardware RAID controller
> card is the best way to manage a large disk array - And this alone would
> wipe out using a PCI Mac.

I believe that Hammer Storage <http://www.hammerstorage.com/> makes a PCI
hardware RAID controller for the Mac. I could be wrong though, their web
site is a little sparse.

--


Aaron B. Ciesar
Data Manager/Analyst
UPMC Stroke Institute




*                    Windows-MacOS Cooperation List                 *

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b2 on Wed Sep 22 1999 - 12:25:33 PDT