30 Mar
2004
30 Mar
'04
7:17 p.m.
[quoting order fixed up -dM]
Like Jay, I've worked with various different unices (for most of my
career, I was a sysadmin at a university research lab), and at one
point one of them was AIX. And I'm with Jay on this.
Perhaps SMIT makes sysadmin simple if you don't mind drinking the IBM
kool-aid - but if you're trying to manage a heterogenous pile of
machines and keep them more or less similar to one another as far as
you can, AIX is practically guaranteed to be an outlier. Way, way out.
We called it "aches" for a reason.
Or at least it was back then. I don't know what it's like now.
/~\ The ASCII der Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
X Against HTML mouse(a)rodents.montreal.qc.ca
/ \ Email! 7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39 4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B
I'm sorry,
but I've worked extensively on many differen't unices,
and AIX is truely evil. Guess if it's the only unix you deal with
so you don't keep having to switch mentality between AIX and
everything else...
I've worked extensively with Solaris, IRIX, Linux, and AIX
for over
twenty years (not Linux - only since release 0.9?) - and in my
opinion, AIX has features that from it's inception were better than
it's competitors - Logical Volumes when no one else had them - and
SMIT - which made system administration simple.