From: rgallen@muug.mb.ca (Rennie Allen) Subject: Re: NT vs Linux (was: Re: truth or dare) Date: Mon, 5 Jul 1993 16:00:42 GMT
>In article <218d8l$llg@flode.nvg.unit.no> agulbra@nvg.unit.no (Arnt Gulbrandsen) writes:
>>
>>Please give me an example of a major OS or workstation vendor who's fixed a
>>bug within 24 hours of your reporting it. Tandem, OK, but Tandem Non-Stop
>>machines aren't in the same class. HP, DEC, Sun, SGI or IBM, MS, have any
>>of them _ever_ fixed a bug (not just given you an already-existing patch)
>>within 24 hours of your reporting it?
>IBM does this on a regular basis. It is one of the reasons that many
>_truly_ mission critical applications run on larger machines (other
>than the need for >1500 disk/tape/printer devices hanging off of single
>machines).
[...] (example)
>How long did this take?
>Well, it was less than 24 hours. In fact, it was less than _3_ hours.
Exactly. This is the type of support which must be available if NT or UNIX
or whatever wants to replace these legacy systems.
I run QNX and I have had bugs fixed in less than 24 hours on many occasions.
This; without subscribing to their "gold" support plan which guarantees 24
hour turnaround time.
I don't doubt that the same type of support could be made available for Linux.
The point is is once you figure in support costs, there is very little price
difference, and since nobody is making money for producing Linux, there is
no incentive to improve it.
Microsoft (and UNIX vendors) are going to have to learn to provide this level
of service. I am sure that they will...
email: rgallen@muug.mb.ca mail: Expert Technology Corporation
QUICS: rgallen (613) 591-0934 34 Riverstone Rd.
Voice: (204) 339-8005 Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada R2V 4B2