> NT has never lived up to expectations, and even OS/2 has a larger installed
> base with faster growth! By your logic we should develop an OS/2 Radius
> before NT.
>
> NT has a lot of growing up to do before it is viable.
According to a recent survey, 70% of non-unix-based webservers were
running on Macintoshes. I use a Mac at home, and I sense a very pressing
need among ISPs to allow our macintoshes to perform administrative
functions on the Portmasters.
If Livingston wants to be competitive, they NEED to port
pmconsole/pminstall to the Macintosh, NOW.
*sarcasm off*
We all have our favorite operating systems. The fact is that
livingston supports what livingston supports, and they're doing REALLY
WELL with it. We run primarily Linux and fBSD, and knew coming in to the
game that there were significant ommissions in the support for those
platforms. Because livingston produces a piece of hardware that you
think is the best solution for your problems doesn't mean that they've
thereby gained some form of responsibility to support every FooNIX and
BarNIX that comes along; quite the contrary:
If you want to use their hardware and don't have the technical
capability to port it to the operating system of your choice, then it is
*your* responsibility to set up a system which is compatable with their
hardware. Otherwise, slap a 16-port multi-io in your NT server and run a
farking BBS, and quit bitching.
-Dave Andersen
(It would be kinda cool to run a radius server on my mac, now that I
think about it. *giggle* :)
--
angio@aros.net Complete virtual hosting and business-oriented
system administration Internet services. (WWW, FTP, email)
http://www.aros.net/ http://www.aros.net/about/virtual/
"She totally confused all the passing piranhas"