OT:Exchange good? - And the flame wars begin (Was:Re:newhotness?)

[Alex Dean]

On Feb 24, 2009, at 1:30 PM, Craig White wrote:

> On Tue, 2009-02-24 at 13:03 -0700, Alex Dean wrote:
>> On Feb 24, 2009, at 12:10 PM, Craig White wrote:
>>>
>>> and then you're be another administrator who never took the time to
>>> understand the underlying technologies, with no derived skills to
>>> troubleshoot problems and no study why other parts/daemons might be
>>> better suited for your particular needs.
>>
>> There are always limits to this argument.  How many people who  
>> install
>> a linux server actually understand the kernel, or even any C code at
>> all?  What if I don't know assembly?  I put myself in that boat,  
>> but I
>> don't think that makes me some know-nothing schlub with no interest  
>> in
>> solving problems.
>>
>> The realm of "things I could learn" is always infinitely larger than
>> "things I have learned", and if you get diverted into the minutae of
>> every possible permutation of every software package, you'll not be a
>> very effective as a system administrator or in any other field.
>>
>> You weaken your argument when you get this pedantic and insist that
>> everyone take your view on things to this degree.
> ----
> yes and no
>
> let's say that you want to extend ldap for hooks to new software. You
> will never get it done unless you understand how it works. If LDAP
> database crashes (i.e. power failure or unceremonious shutdown), how  
> are
> you going to repair it if you don't know how it works? (I see this too
> often when people try to do turnkey LDAP setups).
>
> let's say that Zimbra package uses exceptionally week implementation  
> of
> amavisd that allows a lot of spam to pass through and boss says he  
> wants
> a higher level of filter. There's so many ways that a 'packaged'  
> system
> can come up short but it does provide an easy buy-in to the  
> technology.
> That doesn't necessarily mean that it's a good way to go.
>
> It's not that I insist that everyone take my view on these things -  
> it's
> just a recognition of where/how/why open source came to be as it is.

I agree with everything you're saying.  For any system I would be  
professionally responsible for, I would want to have the kind of  
familiarity you're talking about.  The times I've had to work with  
Plesk and other systems like that, it was like a straightjacket and I  
hated it.  When some odd thing would come up, I couldn't just fix it  
for fear of the whole house of cards falling.

And then there are systems where I just want to get something up  
there, and I'll learn more if & when it all comes crashing down.  In  
those cases I accept that I'm maybe digging my own grave, but I'm  
willing to try it out.  This is more an approach to personal or  
experimental projects, not professional ones, but it's not necessarily  
an illegitimate mindset.  It just depends on your balance between  
longer implementation times, more reliability, better performance vs.  
faster implementation times, less chance for catastrophic disaster,  
worse performance, etc.

As a final note, closed source solutions rarely make my "I'll try it"  
list.  I consider the lack of openness an indicator that I'm more  
likely to have a hard time solving whatever problems do come up.

regards,
alex
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 194 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/pipermail/plug-discuss/attachments/20090224/27492038/attachment.pgp