[aprssig] Smart TNC's vs. KISS and computers was (no subject)

[Ron Stordahl]

Since we are talking about Windows reliability, let me add that I am 
running W2K with UIView32, AGWPE, BPQ32, AR-Cluster, Web and FTP IIS 
server, around the clock for 2 years without a failure.  I keep the OS 
up to date, which means frequent updates.  So it's possible.  I build my 
own machines, so I will take part of the credit..i.e. good hardware.

I am however interested in Linux applications for APRS and will explore 
that as time allows.

I realize there are strong views on these matters, but my paramount 
interest is in reliability, which I have achieved with W2K.

Ron N5IN

A.J. Farmer (AJ3U) wrote:

>I agree with you on the reliablity of Linux, however, I have been running an
>IGate using UI-View on Windows XP for a couple of years with no problem.
>The key is that I have this system dedicated to running UI-View and nothing
>else.  I have disabled all of the unneeded services and otherwise
>"minimized" the system to be dedicated to the task.
>
>Having said all that, I still plan to convert it to APRSd as soon as time
>permits. ;-) LOL
>
>73!
>
>A.J. Farmer, AJ3U
>http://www.aj3u.com
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: aprssig-bounces at lists.tapr.org [mailto:aprssig-bounces at lists.tapr.org]
>On Behalf Of Scott Miller
>Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2005 6:30 PM
>To: TAPR APRS Mailing List
>Subject: Re: [aprssig] Smart TNC's vs. KISS and computers was (no subject)
>
>  
>
>>I myself run a Linux based igate.  I'd NEVER run something as unreliable
>>as windows (any version) for something important like packet radio.
>>I can't see how the winlink people think that windows is good enough for
>> emergency coms.  I don't want to bet my life (or some one else) on
>>Little Billy's OS.
>>
>>Even though I run APRSd on my Linux server, I still run the TNC (KPC3+)
>>so that it is doing all the RF work.  All my computer does is play igate.
>>    
>>
>
>I run APRSd on Linux with a KPC3 (non-plus).  I'd have to say that Windows
>NT or 2000 would probably be just fine, if anyone would write packet
>software as a service, divorced from all the GUI components of the OS,
>rather than as a desktop application.  In the same rack as the Linux box,
>I've got a Windows 2000 server that's been chugging along as long as the
>Linux box, running Oracle, some web services, and occasionally an APRS IS
>listener service.  The Linux server's downtime has only been less because of
>software patches - Linux is a lot better about letting you apply patches
>without rebooting.
>
>Of course, the best thing about running Linux for services is that you can
>easily pare down the system to the bare minimum you need.  Windows gives you
>a lot of stuff whether you want it or not.  And Linux isn't perfect - I
>wouldn't be comfortable connecting a couple of Linux boxes to my external
>RAID array and running high-availability clustering yet.
>
>That's what I've got OpenVMS for.  =]
>
>Scott
>N1VG
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>aprssig mailing list
>aprssig at lists.tapr.org
>https://lists.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aprssig
>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>aprssig mailing list
>aprssig at lists.tapr.org
>https://lists.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aprssig
>  
>