RE: The term "operating system"

[chuck <cswiger@widomaker.com>]

  ----------
  From: 	Michael Katz[SMTP:MKATZ@novell.com]
  Reply To: 	MKATZ@novell.com
  Sent: 	Thursday, November 13, 1997 12:59 PM
  To: 	Multiple recipients of list
  Subject: 	Re: The term "operating system"
  
  Microsoft desktop products.  The facts indicate that NT pales as an
  application server when compared to Unix, and that NT is not even in the
  same category as NetWare 4.11/IntranetWare from Novell as a network
  operating system.
  
  In the same 'what' catagory, performance? Can we expect a posting from novell.com
  to offer an objective, unbiased, factual comparison?
  
  In a similar vein, the latest WindowsNT Magazine has an article detailing their lab tests
  pitting NT head-to-head w/ NetWare 4.11. The only reason I'd take their conclusions over
  yours is that they detail exactely how the experiment was done, what equipment and
  software was used, what was measured and how the data was interpreted. One of the
  principles of science is that I could recreate and independantly verify the experiment
  and it's results.
  
  I used to admire Netware's approach of running all processes in processor ring0 just for
  the shear, raw performance - but this 'shields down' approach means that any module can take
  down the whole server, which is fine if your running a production server w/ known, well tested
  modules. But I just want to have processes 'compartmentalized' and isolated, running in
  their own memory space - what IBM used to advertise as 'Crash Protection'.