RE: I hate OpsConsole!

[Jim Damato <jdamato@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

>In other words, they're behaving like Microsloth

It's a little worse than that.  With an NT/Win2K server, at least the server
IS the console.  There are opportunities for layers of administrative
software or remote administration, but at a minimum you plug in a keyboard,
mouse, and monitor to your server and you're up.  You don't have to install
a separate computer to administer your computer.

-Jim



-----Original Message-----
From: jamesl@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:jamesl@xxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Monday, November 17, 2003 1:28 PM
To: midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: I hate OpsConsole!


Seems to me that the whole "built-in console" issue could be provided for
by the simple expedient of building an off-the-shelf 3488 LU, and perhaps
a KVM switch, so the keyboard and VGA monitor can be shared with something
else, into the CPU cabinet itself.

Those people who actually WANT OpsConsole and OpsNav are welcome to them.
But shoving them down customers' throats is insane. All I ask is that IBM
stop withholding terminal-based access to the functions that are only
available through GUI bloatware.

It's easy enough to see why they would do such a thing. Base greed, plain
and simple. They figure, if a shop has to have a Client Access
installation, and all the server programs needed to support it, then
they'll be more likely to become Client Access shops, instead of going to
Wall Data, WRQ, BOS, Touchtone, or (heaven forbid) REAL TERMINALS for user
desktops.

In other words, they're behaving like Microsloth.

--
JHHL