RE: Cross-Platform Log Analysis and Microsoft

David Corlette wrote:
>I have to disagree a bit here - I personally think syslog is pretty lame, and really should die as quickly as possible.

I think it sucks, too. But it doesn't suck as bad as an "enterprise operating
system" that is deployed on 99.99% of the computers on earth, which was
apparently designed by such retards that they couldn't have taken the time
to add such a trivial capability about 10 years ago.

Anyone who's been following logging knows that I hate syslog with such
a passion that merely thinking about it makes 10-foot laser beams leap
out of my eyes and incinerate random things around me. My blood boils
and a halo of pink steam forms around my head, throbbing the the
gnashing of my teeth and the kodo drum-like thudding of my overworked
heart. Indeed, I hate syslog more than you do. I hate syslog more than
you can IMAGINE.

But it's better than Windows. Let's see - the client side library for
syslog is 32 lines of code. Surely someone at Microsoft could have
implemented that someplace in their "operating system" - Perhaps
they could have used a few of the lines of code that they spent
giving us an animated doggie for our "search" facility (doesn't THAT
just SCREAM "enterprise operating system" to you?)   Someplace
in the 50+-odd million lines of code that went into that abomination
could have been invested in some kind of remote logging capability.
Even if Microsoft had - oh, I don't know - used the syslog-over-TCP
(which isn't really a standard but sucks less than the UDP version...)
it might have taken a total of 45 lines of code. I know that's just
too much to ask.

mjr.