Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!usc!rpi!barryf
From: barryf@aix01.aix.rpi.edu (Barry B. Floyd)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
Subject: PC-NFS & Windows 3.0
Message-ID: <_Z$=48C@rpi.edu>
Date: 13 Mar 91 16:14:00 GMT
References: <1991Mar12.231950.14828@amd.com> <1991Mar13.131141.6436@ccad.uiowa.edu>
Lines: 63
Nntp-Posting-Host: aix01srv.aix.rpi.edu

comp.windows.ms may or may not be the best place to debate the inherent
features of networks and network softare. 

nor may comp.windows.ms be the best place to debate related motivations of
various companies.

Given the likelihood that most readers of this news group are doing so
as a result of association with some form of institution or corporate
entity it is my guess that each of us has to live with a pre-installed
network environment. Some of us may be so lucky as to have installed the
LAN/WAN we have to use/maintain.
 
Whether or not Microsoft or Sun should be more proactive in their support
of PC/Win 3.0 networking is not for use to debate (here). I (and I presume
others) are interested in getting what they have (i.e. their PC, Win 3.0,
network environment, etc.) to work well together. Granted, Microsoft could
be more responsive to more diverse networking needs. And granted, Sun
could be more responsive to PC/Win 3.0 needs. 
 
Sun is offering a product for sale that is proclaimed to provide specific
services for use in a specified environment (e.g. PC, TCP/IP LAN, Win 3.0
GUI, etc.). My interest in exploring PC-NFS (in comparison to any 
available shareware solution, any other commercial solution, PD solution,     
etc.) is simply geared towards getting a job done. Does PC-NFS perform
as advertised? Why is PC-NFS not recognized by Win 3.0 (i.e. lack of
NFS specific drivers)? What does B&W, Novell, FTP offer that may be more
productive given a heterogeneous environment of computing platforms
(e.g. Unix boxes, AIX boxes, DOS/Win boxes, Mac boxes) all running TCP/IP?
 
Novell, as a proprietary solution not addressing the full breadth of
my needs, is not in the running. The remaining TCP/IP solutions are running
neck-and-neck; each has its strengths and each has its weaknesses. The
respective companies producing and selling the products have to produce
uniformly better products to keep up with each other, which is to my
benefit. They have no one else to answer to except me as a customer and
their stock holders. Is any one product noticable better than the others?
 
aside...

I don't believe anyone can sincerely whine about Sun and Microsoft as
companies not working together. They obviously have different missions.
Anyone and everyone should (IMHO) offer constructive criticism where
their products overlap, despite their different missions. As such, I
don't buy the complaint that Microsoft should have provided better support
for NFS, inherent to Win 3.xi, unless Microsoft and Sun wish to unseat
a competitor. It is Sun's job to make the best possible product it
can, and make money doing so, regardless of Microsoft's explicit support
(or lack thereof). In light of the IBM/Novell marraige a Microsoft/Sun
marraige might serve their overlapping product and corporate missions...
 
QUESTIONS:

So far, what are the major contenders for NFS and/or TCP/IP PC networking
support? Which one performs best under which conditions and within which
environments?
 
barry

-- 
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+ 
| Barry B. Floyd                   \\\       barry_floyd@mts.rpi.edu |
| Manager Information Systems - HR    \\\          usere9w9@rpitsmts |
+-Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute--------------------troy, ny 12180-+