In article <[log in to unmask]> Denys Beauchemin
wrote:
>. (I crack up, however, when they refer to UNIX as a secure,
>mission-critical platform.)
 
Denys, I generally agree with all that you have written. But you just
couldn't resist this could you :)
 The bottom line is still to look at the overall business requirements
then plan and purchase accordingly.
Anecdote alert:
I've installed, supported and maintained heterogenous unix environments
for the last 5 years with a smaller support staff than when I was working
with HP3000's although this was long ago and I am sure the MPEXL OS has
probably improved just as all operating systems have since then.
 AIX or HPUX are as secure as you configure them to be. And with
the management tools available, it is trivial for an experienced
administrator. And today experienced administrators are a dime a dozen.
Many of the major corporations in this area ARE using UNIX with
there secure mission-critical applications. The last production environment
that I supported went 200+ days of continuous uptime with out failure. The
failure was disk, not os related.
 I personally think that in a one on one comparison MPE still makes eminent
sense for many companies from a cost/performance perspective. But not for
most. I also think that people think of unix as some sort of panacea. And
that if they don't consult with people who've been there, their horrible
business practices are blamed on a mostly harmless operating system.
The first migration that i participated in was from MPE-XL to HP-UX
primarily to move to a rdbms (oracle). Whether the drive to Oracle made
any sense at the time, I couldn't tell you.
Bottom line:
UNIX has matured period. There are production "mission
critical" applications running at Fortune 1000 Corporations all over the
place.
 
Peace,
 
Byron Nesheim