[cobalt-users] A good opinion

[chris <chris@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Just my two cents as a member of the technical staff of our company; we
are using Cobalt servers since the beta version of RaQ1, one of the
first RaQ1 server released still running flawlessly at our facility. We
have had very few disk failures on RaQ2 servers and very few crashes,
but nothing that involves Cobalt. We run tens of RaQ1, RaQ2 and RaQ3
servers, some servers spinning from september 1998. Early RaQ1 were
designed for 50 sites, it was and is still a perfectly safe number of
sites per box. We do our job, i mean we administrate and check each
server regularely and we do not use the blue boxes for tasks they have
not been designed for. We have had customers moving to big NT servers
with dual pentium to discover their pages were not displayed faster on
the customer's browsers. The RaQ2 is the server i prefer: easy to repair
and almost bugfree.

In my opinion, these servers properly used and managed are reliable,
fast enough and easy to setup, so exactly what Cobalt intended to build.
Do not install patches before reading this list :-) . 
In three years, we have contacted Cobalt by email half dozain times to
fix problems, they always returned answers quickly and properly.

Some of us are trying to run down Cobalt. Though not perfect, their
boxes (at least until the RaQ3) are a good job. Just wanted to be fair
with Cobalt.

chris
-- 
Zarcrom Industries Corporation
25 Greystone Manor
Lewes, DE 19958
http://www.zarcrom.com/