i don't feel like organizing this... (make the textbox wider for input and i might in the future)

you can buy many more operating systems besides windows and novell
to name a few: solaris, bsdi, openbsd, netbsd, aix, hp-ux and sco.

I've personally used solaris, bsdi, openbsd, (freebsd, linux,) and solaris. when you say they are standardized, so are the others. but i think you're referring to them being standardized to each other. it's called proprietary, which is something most of the operating systems i named aren't. (for example, an array of filesystem support). Also, every operating system has one set of software too, just like windows and novell. They called them pre-compiled binaries. You're probably thinking of versions for different architectures and library dependencies (which windows has for sure).
How do you manage a network if everything is different? Skill. You're right though, Linux is sucking more and more. I've read posts about Redhat 8 (even though I don't use it), it's amazing to learn that people don't use it because of it's debilitated development. anyway, linux support (for the mainstream) is and has always been less than satisfactory (for the users) because it requires skill. we don't want to deal with them, they don't want to deal with the operating system. why do they do it? i know i did it because windows was boring on a pentium 75 and a 28800bps modem. connecting to other people's computers through telnet (which requires nothing much than 2400bps to be efficient) seemed to do the job (this eventually lead to me installing locally).
oh yeah, every linux distribution is not as different as you think. they all offer the main packages (such as gcc, glibc, kernel, etc) and whatever they don't offer is available in tar.gz/bz2, etc. to install manually (without package support). MANY programs are offered in packages too, especially freebsd ports and debian deb's. gentoo linux even adopted freebsd ports to adapt the freebsd ports crowd... so inconsistencies among operating systems is not an issue.

the big thing here is that you probably had some issue buying something for linux and not being able to install it. linux accels in the fact that all the resources are free for people to use as they wish (like whoever here giving out the backend to his web site). phpbb can be given out for free and modified for your own uses. "Powered by a hacked version of phpBB, #1 forum software" that's why you don't see many cd's in the store. Also, these operating systems are tailored for professionals (with skill) and might not be in a home office/small office computer store. most are offered on the company/distributor's web site or larger scale stores (www.cdw.com for example).
you don't need x11 for any unix environment. in fact, macosx lets you in console mode (log in as >console).

ok i'm done reply and tell me what needs clarifying

Nothing needs clarifying. Novell is a network operating system.

What makes a good network operating system?

- Ease of use
- Seemless integration
- High Reliability
- Directory Management
- Low Cost

Lets talk about the last point, low cost. Low cost does not specifically mean the cost of the OS, but the cost of deployment + IT staff supporting the OS + Help Desk, etc. With an easy to use, powerfull NOS the cost will be very low. Linux is free, but you are going to need many more people supporting it, versus Windows or Novell.

One word for Windows - security updates. Novell simply doesn't have security updates - its secure out of the box. You often need to take down the server to apply these updates - lowering reliability, and you need more trained professionals to apply the updates - increasing management costs.

Novell wins again :-).

quote:
Novell (and Windows, for this case) will defeat Linux. Maybe not in a year, but it will come eventually.

Novell will defeat Linux or join it? I know this is an old post, but how times have changed.

quote:
When you go to a store (or e-store), you can go and pick up a Novell or Windows title. Get home, pop the CD in, and install it. With lots of ease, and hardly and hassle.

I bought RH7.3 in Sept. of 2002, and took it home. Installed without any problems. Was up and running in about 1 hour. That was when I did not know anything about linux besides that it was an OS.

Novell has its up sides and down sides. personally i think novell will die out over the next 5-10 years, it was made back in the day when windows had no security, and now that windows NT serries is higly stable and powerfull novell will die out, its just as epxensive if not more so than windows, a Novell 6.5 server needs a MININUM of 180megs of ram just to boot and run the GUI, i belive windows 2k3 will run on 128 megs of ram (not recomended, but my 2k3 runs flawlessly on 196)

Windows is moving more towards some linux features, and Linux keeps gettin more and more like windows its just time before no one will be able to tell them apart

well, i'm not so sure about N dying out. granted, there's been times that 1 could hardly call them nimble, but i think theyve been drinking, let alone smelling, the coffee lately. i think it was a nice strategic move 4 them to buy SuSE, although we'll need to wait & c if it pays off. either way, theyll find a way to evolve, imo.

I agree that Novell it easy to setup: setup and install the server, setup a user account, go the the client pc and load the Novell client, reboot then search the tree, the context, the server and then login.

I had such a hard time trying to get SAMBA up with Redhat9 (the hard part was trying to access it from a Windows PC) and I got my Novell 5.1 server setup and accessable in no time.

Linux is great though and I think it will have a big future if it keeps advancing like it has and becomes more user friendly.