Unbiased Netware 5.0 vs. Windows 2K comparison

[dsturgeon]

I am looking for an unbiased comparison of the performance between the two Operating systems on the same hardware. Can anyone point me in the right direction? The only information and data I haev found so far can be traced back to either the Microsoft or Novell sites.

Thanks Fish

"Your worst day is only 24 hours long"

 

[Cassaro]

I'm sorry I dont have information to point you to. But, I have a mixed enviroment with Novell 5.1 and Windows 2000 server. I prefer the Novell server Chuck
tek-tips@aspenpkg.com

 

[GlenJohnson]

I can't give you any info either, but I'm in the process of converting a mixed network, (Novell 4.0 and W2K). I like the W2k server better, but the novell platform is older, so I can't compare them. I do know I've heard MS stole the AD idea from Novells equivelant. Don't know if it's true, and don't really care, but I just like W2K better all around. Glen A. Johnson
Microsoft Certified Professional
gjohn76351@msn.com

"You cannot create experience. You must undergo it."
Albert Camus (1913-1960); French writer and philosopher

 

[dsturgeon]

Do you both like/prefer the W2K strictly based on its interface or are you basing this on performance? I prefer to have a homogenous network and am a Microsoft guy also, but I do not want to convert to stright MS and end up with a 50% drop in file server performance.

Thanks. Fish

"Your worst day is only 24 hours long"

 

[Cassaro]

I know that a Novell server has better performance numbers based on my observations here with identical base machines. But, if your a Microsoft guy you will be better off on a W2K server if you have never worked with Novell. Personally I think W2K is harder to work with but Novell is my primary system. I also doubt that you will see a performance difference between the two unless you have a large network.

I'm sure that Glen will agree with me on suggesting the W2K server based on your comments.
Chuck
tek-tips@aspenpkg.com

 

[GlenJohnson]

Yup. The thing I like about MS though is if you go and get certified, you find contacts that are really good. I took two classes that were taught by one of the people that worked on developing w2k, and he told us if we ever need help, since he taught us, he'll awnser questions via e-mail for the rest of his life. He even stopped in and looked at how my conversion was going without charge, (This was extremely nice of him, and I bet not many people would do it.) Having a contact that worked on the system is great. I say, go w2k, get certified, and make a lot of use of the tek-tips. Good luck. Glen A. Johnson
Microsoft Certified Professional
gjohn76351@msn.com

"You cannot create experience. You must undergo it."
Albert Camus (1913-1960); French writer and philosopher

 

[dsturgeon]

Thanks for the insight gentlemen. We currently have 5 NW 5.0 servers running and they perform the file and prit services very well. We do not have any trouble with them and I know enough about them to be dangerous. The basic issue is that if I need to replace our servers (lease expiration), do I bring in staight W2K or continue to run NW also. Once again thanks for the opinions. Fish

"Your worst day is only 24 hours long"

 

[prew]

i have worked with novell for about 10 yrs, for some reason.. that i dont even recall now, we decided to go 2k....and im about ready to toss the dadgum thing out the window. never had the battles with novell that we are having with 2000 server....so...for whatever that opinion is worth...its out there. ~~~ misery loves company....wanna hangout? ~~~

 

[GlenJohnson]

Hang in there. Once you figure it out, (Even if you have to bring in help), it's worth it. Good luck... Glen A. Johnson
Microsoft Certified Professional
gjohn76351@msn.com

"It still holds true that man is most uniquely human
when he turns obstacles into opportunities".
Eric Hoffer (1902-83), U.S. philosopher.

 

[Jpoandl]

Seeing how you have to move you servers off the current hardware anyway (and there is a lot of work just by doing that), I would compare the price.

1) Licensing pricing: (Not sure who is cheaper..probably Novell)

2) Operating System Support Pricing: (MS is probably cheaper..due to sites like this, availability of MCSE's, and free product support that MS provides [Service packs and software security updates, etc]

3) Third Party Software Compatibility: There are probably more third party software that is compatible with Windows 2K...due to its popularity.

As for the arguement of performance... In my opinion, Novell and 2K is about the same. Maybe a little more performance from Novell. However, hardware is so cheap right now. A Compaq DL380 (with dual Pentium III 1.2GHZ CPU + 1GB of memory redundant everything) is well under $10,000 with 3 year, 4 hour, 24/7 hardware suppport contract. So, buy a little more horsepower if you think you need it.

My guess is that Windows 2000 is the better option. It is highly supported by Microsoft. There is reason why most companies are moving away from Novell and towards MS.

You may want to place this same post on a Novell website for a good comparison. I know a little bit about Novell...mostly from my expiernces migratiing servers from NetWare to NT... But I am no expert on the subject.

I hope this helps..
Joseph L. Poandl
MCSE 2000

If your company is in need of experts to examine technical problems/solutions, please check out

http://www.esavio.com

 

[yizhar]

HI.

Two more notes about Netware file servers:

* The salvage option is great when you need it,
so take it also in consideration.

* The automatic comression of Netware seems to me like a bad idea, and can degrade performance when you want to copy many files that were untouched for a while.
I suggest disabling the compression on the Netware servers unless you realy need it (and if so - buy more disk space).

Bye
Yizhar Hurwitz

http://come.to/yizhar

http://teachers.sivan.co.il/yizhar