tony@scotty.dccs.upenn.edu (Anthony Olejnik) (05/07/91)
There's a group here on campus that is in the process of putting together
an AppleTalk network.
They have hired a consultant who has a background with Novell's Network
(and is a Novell VAR).
He is suggesting to use Netware and Mac VAP/NLM instead of Apple's
AppleShare file server software.
From what I understand, Mac VAP is used with Netware 286 while Mac NLM is
used with Netware 386.
The consultant has indicated to me that Netware is a better performer
and have increased security features than AppleShare file server.
QUESTION: Is the consultant correct? is a Network server running
Mac VAP/NLM (on an 80x86 system) better than AppleShare
file server (on a Mac)?
Thanks.
--tony
MacUserLabs@cup.portal.com (Stephan - Somogyi) (05/07/91)
tony@scotty.dccs.upenn.edu (Anthony Olejnik) writes: >Is the consultant correct? is a Network server running Mac VAP/NLM >(on an 80x86 system) better than AppleShare file server (on a Mac)? For an easy answer to the question see (yes, folks, you guessed it) the June issue of MacUser, where servers were tested. We didn't get NW 3.11 and the AFP NLM in time, but we did compare AShare (on various Macs) and NW 2.15c. The vague answer to the question, however, is that the "best" server depends entirely on the application. Database transactions are quite different than mass file-copying, and some servers do better in one than another. We will almost certainly be looking at NW 3.11 with NW/Mac 3.0 (the NLM) in an upcoming issue. ______________________________________________________________________ Stephan Somogyi No. No. No. I'm NOT with MIS. MacUser
JSIMPSON@MIAMIU.BITNET (Joe Simpson) (05/08/91)
In article <42706@netnews.upenn.edu>, tony@scotty.dccs.upenn.edu (Anthony Olejnik) says: >The consultant has indicated to me that Netware is a better performer >and have increased security features than AppleShare file server. > >QUESTION: Is the consultant correct? is a Network server running > Mac VAP/NLM (on an 80x86 system) better than AppleShare > file server (on a Mac)? See "File Servers" by David Beaver, Tim Standing, and the MacUser Labs Staff, MacUser, June 1991. They discuss performance and operation of many options including Novell. They conclude that the most cost effective AppleShare file server is a Mac SI running Appleshare. Novell does show up well, compared with other non-Apple solutions. Novell servers are routinely configured with a host of fault tolerance/redundant hardware options. If these are important, Novell is more attractive. I don't believe that there is any enhanced security (as distinguished from reliability). Management will require a Novell expert. We use departmental secretaries and administrative assistants to admin. Appleshare networks. If you have MS-DOS/Windows/OS2 machines they would be well served by Novell as well.
a2mp@PSUORADM.CC.PDX.EDU (Michael Perrone) (05/08/91)
> There's a group here on campus that is in the process of putting together > an AppleTalk network. > > They have hired a consultant who has a background with Novell's Network > (and is a Novell VAR). > > He is suggesting to use Netware and Mac VAP/NLM instead of Apple's > AppleShare file server software. > > >From what I understand, Mac VAP is used with Netware 286 while Mac NLM is > used with Netware 386. > > The consultant has indicated to me that Netware is a better performer > and have increased security features than AppleShare file server. > > QUESTION: Is the consultant correct? is a Network server running > Mac VAP/NLM (on an 80x86 system) better than AppleShare > file server (on a Mac)? > 1) Are there going to be DOS machines on this network? 2) Is it a localtalk only network? If you answer NO to 1 and YES to 2, Netware doesn't make any sense at all compared to Appleshare. Novell is great for networks that bring PC's and Mac's together on the same file server. Otherwise Appleshare costs less and it *so much easier* to administer than novell (although I must say, the new release (v 2.2) of netware 286 has an easier to use "netgen," than the 2.15 releases). Is Netware a better performer than appleshare? It depends. If you are running a small network over localtalk, then localtalk's slow speed is your bottleneck, an no amount of cache, speed, etc. on the server is going to do you any good. Novell security features are more extensive than AppleShare. But the features of Appleshare may be adequate for the task. What good are extra options if you don't need them? Another thing- Appleshare 3.0 will come out in a few months, and have some things that Netware doesn't- like network booting support. ----------------------------------------------------------- Michael Perrone PSU Computing Services a2mp@psuoradm.cc.pdx.edu (503) 725-3112 -----------------------------------------------------------
Todd Strauch (05/08/91)
>The consultant has indicated to me that Netware is a better performer >and have increased security features than AppleShare file server. > >QUESTION: Is the consultant correct? is a Network server running > Mac VAP/NLM (on an 80x86 system) better than AppleShare > file server (on a Mac)? > Recent articles in several Mac trade publications, have placed Novell's Netware 3.11 running MAC VAP/NLM at the same level as Apple's AppleShare product. On a 386 machine, speed is about the same. Netware does have security advantages, particularly at the file level. Though our department does not currently have a Novell network, we are considering one after working with one on another department's network. It was running Novell's Netware 3.11 on an IBM PS/2 model 95 (33mhz, 486) and it screamed. Access via a Mac was seamless and performance far outstripped our IIci AppleShare server. To be fair, though, the PS/2 was not heavily used while the IIci is almost always at it's 50 user limit.