Re: Duplicate SCO Install
From: Jean-Pierre Radley (jpr_at_jpr.com)
Date: 12 Jun 2003 18:04:45 -0400
KDF11-A typed (on Thu, Jun 12, 2003 at 02:25:42PM +0000):
| : I doubt that you have. And that's the point. Your scripts do NOT
| have the features and reliability of the Supertars.
| So what's the argument over then? If I've not done it, dismiss me as a
| liar and go on with it. It is rather funny that you make claims and
| assumptions that everyone else is with you, but as I see it... you stand
| alone in your accusations. True... my scripts may not have the features
| as the Supertars, but they were written for me... and me alone. I don't
| require features; just something that works. Reliability is moot. The
| scripts are solely used to clone the system, rebrand/rebadge it, and get
| it out the door. If all this was blown out of proportion because you
| thought I was telling people not to back up their machines, you were
| mistaken. For backups we install tapes.
Tony is not alone, not in the slightest. Brian White has spoken up,
others might or might not, but I will too.
For backups. Tony, and I, and most everoyne else, *also* install tapes.
And those of us who think business data are essential to the survival
of a business see to it that the business uses BackupEDGE or LoneTar to
put bit-level verified backups on those tapes.
If you don't want to use either of them, don't. If you're happy with
the features afforded by your scripts, stay happy. If your scripts'
reliability is moot and that's OK for you, live that way.
But insofar as you have not tried any of those products, you do not know
what you are talking about (in particular, you do not seem to understand
that backups are just one of their features, the cloning of machines
being another), and thus you should stop your unfounded disparagement of