From: MA=Crist%Info_Sys%STG_IS@DSO3.DSD.TRW.COM
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.banyan-l
Subject: Banyan vs Novell
Date: 9 Nov 92 16:48:39 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU

Richard:

>For most students, even computer literate ones, e:\apps\bcpp is bad enough,
>"BCPP@APPS" if worse, and the more normal Banyan-ite
>"Borland C++@Applications@MathCS" is ridiculous.  Couple that with the
>lack of a reasonable method for adding to the path, e.g., the
>Novell MAP INS S1:= construct, and StreetTalk is a royal pain in the
>butt for most users.

I could see where it might be a problem for San Jose students.  It was never a
problem for my students from Cal State Northridge.  Path construct;+ works
just fine for me in the Sample Profile.  Fortunately, since StreetTalk makes
everything so easy to find, our poor users don't have to be issueing MAP
commands all day.

>Absolutely false.  Every review that has ever been done has shown that there
>is a very large overhead to StreetTalk, and the overhead is geometrically
>proportional to the largest group that resides on a given server.  There
>is no case in which StreetTalk overhead and Novell bindery overhead are
>even remotely comparable.

I have never seen a fair review of VINES.  Remember folks, most of these
magazines derive a large portion of their revenues from Novell advertising.
Need I say more.  Obviously, you've never worked with WANs Richard, because
while StreetTalk slows down a bit servicing requests across a WAN, Netware
falls apart.

>Banyan assisted InfoWorld in tuning the server.

This, I doubt very much.  But, I would like to hear from some of the Banyan
people out there.  True or false?

>What about Source Routing support.  Novell supplied it with 2.15C, but
>made the parts available so that anyone with 2.1x could add it.  Banyan
>required an upgrade to get it.  What about Windows client support;
>Novell supplied it for every version later than 2.10, even though it
>came out when 2.15C was shipping.  Banyan required an upgrade to 4.10
>(and did not provide it until >2 years after Windows 3.0 came out).  Same
>with OS/2 support.  Banyan requires an upgrade for every new little piece
>of software/hardware that is released!  If I want OS/2 2.0 support I
>will need to do YAU - Yet Another Upgrade.

Sorry Richard, wrong again.  Windows support was available with 4.0.  In fact,
I began using Windows on VINES with the combo of Win 386 2.11 and VINES 3.10.
OS/2 2.0 support has been available (basically to anyone who asks for it) for
some time on the Limited Availability program.  If ever there was a company
that nit picked you to death, it's Novell.  I need 5 Novell servers and
gateways to do the job of a single VINES server.  The real trap is that Novell
just doesn't give you much to begin with (transport, file and print).  So,
it's a case of mo' money, mo' money for third party products (print server,
mail, management, security services, etc.) to get Netware to where it is on
par with VINES.


>+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+
>|   Richard M. Warner   |   Internet:  rick@sjsumcs.sjsu.edu  |
>|                       | CompuServe:  71121,2257             |
>+-----------------------+-------------------------------------+
>|  ** DISCLAIMER:  All opinions are strictly my own.  I work  |
>|                  hard enough at forming them!               |
>+-------------------------------------------------------------+


Mike Crist
TRW
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU