On Wednesday 21 November 2001 11:09 pm, you wrote: > I work for a small retailer and run a mixed environment. Red Hat and win > 98 we also have an NT server. I believe that the servers, yes both, have > been up and running for more than 7 months each. No problems with either > OS except their inherent deficentcies. Lack of applications on Linux and > Viruses on Windows. Nearly every patch I've applied in NT requires a reboot - killing uptime. We've got some NT boxes that have good uptimes, but with the frequency of patches I'd say none of them are over a couple months. I think the mail server is the only one that hasn't been rebooted in 6 months (go rockliff mailsite). With me - win9x/NT have required fairly regular reboots, and proof that this is not just me is the universal piece of advise to fix a microsoft box - have you rebooted it? The ones that seem to have an uptime of more than a week tend to only run one service. Unix boxes (solaris/linux/etc) that run multiple services are known to stay up for literally years, and something requiring a reboot is mainly due to hardware failure - not OS related. Heck, the email/www/ftp/mud/icecast/dns server I've got has been up for nearly 300 days and there's not even a reboot in sight. In that time I've upgraded nearly every component besides the kernel itself. Now, win2k I've heard good things about uptime/stability wise, but haven't had a reason to try it yet. -dallas > > Charles Reynolds > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Kimi A. Adams" > To: > Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2001 10:19 AM > Subject: Re: Woohoo!!! > > > Well, well. Now it just seems like someone's joy is someone's thorn. I > > believe that having a Windows machine up more than three days is a feat > > beyond having a Linux server up a whole year. But then again, I also get > > a > > > warm fuzzy when my machine doesn't perform some type of screw up on a > > daily > > > basis. Those .dll files can be quite a pain in the neck. So, I would > > like > > > to put this into perspective. If you have a server that hasn't crashed > > or stopped working or been accidentally reformatted at least once, then I > > congratulate you with my whole heart and being. But, on Windows, whether > > it needs it or not, we start from scratch every few months. No > > notification needed, definitely no crying required. But then again, > > notifications can be quite a preempt to a larger problem at hand. > > Wishing well to those that have made it more than three days............ > > > > : ) > > > > Kimi > > > > At 11/21/01, you wrote: > > >Wooho? Would you (if you could) set up a 'at' command to > > >do something like this: > > >'uptime | mail -s "See how well we are doing!" cfo@yourcompany.com' > > > > > >Doesn't look so impressive at that point does it? :-) > > > > > >On Wed, Nov 21, 2001 at 09:19:53AM -0700, Craig White wrote: > > > > Digital Wokan wrote: > > > > > I didn't think Windows had an uptime command. (If they did, it was > > > > > apparently so shamefully low, they removed it from Win2K.) > > > > > > > > > > George Toft wrote: > > > > > >I am not bashing Microsoft, but in a fit of glory, I must share > > > > > >my elation. I have nursed my Windows box along to record heights > > > > > >in uptime: > > > > > > > > > > > >============================================================= > > > > > >Microsoft(R) Windows 98 > > > > > > (C)Copyright Microsoft Corp 1981-1998. > > > > > > > > > > > >C:\WINDOWS>uptime > > > > > > 00:41:07 up 6 days, 5:17, 1 user > > > > > >C:\WINDOWS> > > > > > >============================================================= > > > > > > > > ---------- > > > > I get very good uptimes from Windows NT 4.0 / SP6a - so that is not a > > > > big deal - Windows 98 isn't very impressive. > > > > > > > > There is a Micosoft Windows Diagnostic Tool on Win98SE that will > > report > > > > > these things like uptime. > > > > > > > > Craig > > > > ________________________________________________ > > > > See http://PLUG.phoenix.az.us/navigator-mail.shtml if your mail > > doesn't > > > > post to the list quickly and you use Netscape to write mail. > > > > > > > PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us > > > > http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss > > > > > >________________________________________________ > > >See http://PLUG.phoenix.az.us/navigator-mail.shtml if your mail doesn't > > >post to the list quickly and you use Netscape to write mail. > > > > > >PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us > > >http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss > > > > ________________________________________________ > > See http://PLUG.phoenix.az.us/navigator-mail.shtml if your mail doesn't > > post to the list quickly and you use Netscape to write mail. > > > PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us > > http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss > > ________________________________________________ > See http://PLUG.phoenix.az.us/navigator-mail.shtml if your mail doesn't > post to the list quickly and you use Netscape to write mail. > > PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us > http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss