IT Employment

Ask something
Discussion Locked

PET PEEVE: Rebooting NT Servers

0 helpful
11 replies

by salmonslayer

Closed to new repliesThis discussion is closed. It stays readable, but it takes no new replies.

Can anybody offer any insight as to why it is necessary to reboot NT boxes whenever you do some mundane task????

Uninstall an old antivirus program - must reboot. Install a new antivirus program - must reboot. Change any settings - must reboot. Sneeze on the keyboard - must reboot (or so it seems).

With my trusty Novell box - unload previous antivirus nlm. Load new antivirus program onto sys volume. Load nlm. Completely transparent to the user, and does not require a reboot.

Change a video card on NT requires at least three reboots. On my Linux server, turn off computer, install card, turn on computer, slide in Linux cd-rom. No reboots!

And people still claim that NT is better than Novell or Linux?!?!?!?!?

11 replies

by tomsal

Glad I'm not alone. It drives me crazy that Windows OS (all flavors, not just NT) need re-boots for so many things. That wastes time too because around here a large number of our employees are just barely computer literate, so if me or someone from my department doesn't wait until the PC turns back on and properly boots - god forbid, the user may have to use a brain cell to figure out you need to log on to the network and that is just too much for some to bear. ;)

On the other hand though I think the fact that you don't have to re-boot one OS over another for changes doesn't, in and of itself, make it better or worse than any other.

Personally, I like each for different things. As good as Linux is for a web platform, I'd never use it (at least not yet) for our main LAN servers. As good as Novell is for printer and file servers, I wouldn't use it for a web server. NT makes a decent LAN server it also is a good choice for running SQL 7.0 databases, but it sucks for file and printserving (novell stomps it) and its lacking in web serving (Linux laughs in its face).

Anyway. later.

(Pray for me I need to explain the concept of file attachments to a user....) (hehehe)..

by salmonslayer

What are those???
My Antivirus program consists of telling users that if they see a little paperclip beside an e-mail message, that means it should be deleted immediately!! (Yeah, right! Don't I wish!)

I agree wholeheartedly about each server OS having its place -- the problem is that today the decisions are often made by the "Powers that Be" who decide what should be bought based on advertising. We run a mixed network, and I wouldn't have it any other way. Build on the strengths of eachOS in order to cover up the weaknesses of others.

By the way, I am now in the process of restoring my Exchange server after spending all day trying to get Antigen and Norton to cooperate. Finally, I talk to one tech support guy who says "Oh, youcan't do that!". When I take off Antigen, Exchange doesn't work; when I take off Norton, Exchange still doesn't work. Am I having fun, or what?

(Keep repeating "Stress is good. Stress is good. Stress is good. . .)

by frstdone

It's particularly annoying to have to go around to every users workstation and let them know I'm about to reboot the server, then have to explain things to them that they don't care about but feel they need to know. And of course, as was stated previously, God forbid they have to fire up a brain cell and re-logon to the server.

by admin

For us types that get paid to keep things running. Your video card example is perfect as an example of either getting paid for more hours yourself, or helping others out by hiring additional staff.

:>

by bill cromwell

I am probably just confused (as usual) but your comment sounds like "NT is best for featherbedding"! Featherbedding BTW is creation of jobs that are not really needed.

Bill

by salmonslayer

'nuff said (but of course I will say more).

Using that logic, OS/2 (which btw is still my favorite OS of all time) would be the best. I can just imagine the damage that one of my users could do with that much power at their fingertips! Talk about job security . . .

Of course, the biggest problem is that my IT department consists of just me, and I have over 100 workstations plus a bunch of servers and printers that must be kept running. It is often difficult to find the time necessary to babysit an NT box.

by admin

Yep. We don't "Featherbead" at work either. NT administration is best done at those companies that can afford babysitters, and we can't either.

So although it may be inferior for those that wish to build IT departments on a grand scale, Linux continues to be our primary server OS.

:>

by timmitchell

I had to suppress a rolling laugh when I read your reply... great one!

Everyone make sure and get your MCSE rather than your RHCE, 'cause Windows will break down much more often than RedHat (and breakdowns equal overtime, right?)

by mckaytech

I wish I could find the original reference but somewhere I saw a statement that the annual cost of productivity losses due to re-booting WindowsNT computers in the U.S. is $23 billion. I think it may have been in marketing materials for Windows2000because the context of the statement implied that most of that would be saved if everyone upgraded to Windows2000.

paul

by timmitchell

You bring up an interesting sidenote. It has always seemed that a big part of Microsoft's advertising strategy has been to bash their own prior releases. Interesting.

If I walked into a job interview and told the manager how bad a job I'd done at my previous employer, and went on to make promises about how well I'd do at his company, what would be the likelihood that I'd be hired? Maybe it's new math, but it doesn't add up to me.

by ebob

This is a true story: it happened to me...

We had some friends over for a weekend. Roast Beef for supper (hmmmmm). My wife prepared the roast (a little seasoning, some garlic, and so on) and dropped it into the pan with some onions and potatoes. My buddy & I sat back making sure the wine didn't evaporate, when his wife pipes up "Aren't you going to cut the end off?"

"Huh?", we all asked. (I stress: all.)

"Oh yeah, sure, you're 'supposed' top cut the end off."

"And do what with the piece you cut off?"

"Toss it out."

After about 15 minutes 'discussion' around this point we all convinced Laura (my friend's wife) that shoe ought to trust that "this will be OK".

Of course, the roast was fine (and the 2nd bottle of wine didn't evaporate, either).

Later we all got curious and asked why Laura thought that the end of the roast needed to be cut off and tossed. "That's the way my mother taught me." We all convinced her to ask her mom about it, next time she went visiting.

So she did, and her response was "that's the way my mother taught me." So of course they headed over to the nursing home to see Granny.

These two are standing in front of Granny asking why it's so important that the end of the roast be cut off. These two misunderatood the stunned look on Granny's face and began explainign it all over again when she interrupted. "You two! Weren't you paying attention. In those days, the butcher cut a roast 'this long'", motioning with her hands, "but the pan we had was only 'this long'". Of course, her hands were a bit closer together. "So I had to chop the end off. Hell, the dog loved it!"

In other words: That's the way we have always done it around here.

This discussion is closed to new replies.