Linked by snydeq on Tue 8th Mar 2011 23:54 UTC
Windows Grizzled Unix vet Paul Venezia tips his cap to the Windows Server crew, suggesting that the lessons of Unix history have not been lost on Microsoft -- and that's one reason why Windows Server has become so complex. 'The Windows Server of today has more in common with Unix than many people want to admit. The upside: more stable servers, greater scope of services, better adherence to standards, and Microsoft's newfound willingness to work with its competition. The downside is that Windows has become more complex than Unix from a management and administration point of view,' Venezia writes, even if he still sees some Windows admin practices as prime examples of how not to administer servers.
Thread beginning with comment 465427
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: digging
by saso on Wed 9th Mar 2011 12:15 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: digging"
saso
Member since:
2007-04-18

OP doesn't talk about gui vs. non-gui, he's talking about Unix being a really elegant way of designing a system by not overdesigning it. In Windows, settings reside in the registry, INI files, binary configuration files and are scattered about the filesystem without any sense of organizational structure.

The Unix *culture* on the other hand is that of building on top of existing infrastructure. Unix has a fairly well designed and simple file system, so you just put conffiles in /etc, just like everybody else does. Of course there's the odd misfit who doesn't play nice, instead scattering their crap around in /opt/vendor/package or /usr/package - those are then ridiculed in the Unix culture, rather than glorified.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: digging
by jptros on Wed 9th Mar 2011 14:28 in reply to "RE[3]: digging"
jptros Member since:
2005-08-26

OP doesn't talk about gui vs. non-gui, he's talking about Unix being a really elegant way of designing a system by not overdesigning it. In Windows, settings reside in the registry, INI files, binary configuration files and are scattered about the filesystem without any sense of organizational structure.


I'm pretty sure he wasn't saying that either. No, I interpreted it as "I don't know my way around windows server and I'm having to do some work to figure things out therefore it sucks." Funny thing is, there's probably some windows server admin saying the same thing right now about a [insert unfamiliar system] they inherited responsibility for.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[5]: digging
by Doc Pain on Wed 9th Mar 2011 15:51 in reply to "RE[4]: digging"
Doc Pain Member since:
2006-10-08

I'm pretty sure he wasn't saying that either. No, I interpreted it as "I don't know my way around windows server and I'm having to do some work to figure things out therefore it sucks." Funny thing is, there's probably some windows server admin saying the same thing right now about a [insert unfamiliar system] they inherited responsibility for.


Allow me to quote from the article "Nine traits of the veteran Unix admin":

Veteran Unix admin trait No. 8: We know more about Windows than we'll ever let on

Though we may not run Windows on our personal machines or appear to care a whit about Windows servers, we're generally quite capable at diagnosing and fixing Windows problems. This is because we've had to deal with these problems when they bleed over into our territory. However, we do not like to acknowledge this fact, because most times Windows doesn't subscribe to the same deeply logical foundations as Unix, and that bothers us.

*** end quote ***

From this idea, I would assume that a capable UNIX admin is able to gain knowledge of ANY operating system because he is able to learn new things, to abstract, to conclude - those are the basic means of his everyday work. On the other hand, a "Windows" admin may not be able to do so as the mentioned abilities are usually not required for his work, as they do not conform with MICROS~1's way of doing things. Searching for logical structures in a system that does everything in an arbitrarily designed way won't work. I also found from my own experience that UNIX admins don't bother learning new things, as this is also part of their job, and they are usually able to use adopted knowledge very fast; the "Windows" admins I met insist on doing things the one way they've initially learned (although they traditionally claim they didn't have to learn anything, which is untrue), and they refuse to change things. Those concepts of behaviour can be compared to the academic type, utilizing scientific apporaches, seeking for less manual work, and the consumer way of buying made-ready solutions that he can use out of the box, requiring virtually no knowledge about how it works interally. This approach of course involves either higher costs or more manual work. Maybe this is due to the fact that they needed much time to get things working? Manually? Or it's caused by business environments that have to pay attention to legacy as they're still using outdated systems that will lose manufacturer's support in... 2014 I think... and still don't see any need to get a new view on things - catastrophe preprogrammed. Then it will be the UNIX admins keeping their stuff on life support. :-)

Please don't get me wrong: This is just my very individual observation and conclusion which I do not claim to be valid and mandatory everywhere. And I didn't want to say that handcrafting is any bad. A quite inaccurate comparison, I know...

Reply Parent Score: 4