[ntp:questions] Re: Tardis issue on 64-bit

David Woolley david at djwhome.demon.co.uk
Sat Sep 30 09:05:38 UTC 2006

In article <451D8011.7090802 at ntp.isc.org>,
mayer at ntp.isc.org (Danny Mayer) wrote:

> Can we move on? My remark was due to the fact that Tardis is a
> commercial product and the first place one should turn to is the support
> people for the product in question. If you don't get a useful response

I also sympathise with the idea that commercial (including shareware
in this case) should not be able to rely on peer support groups to avoid
their responsibility to support the product.

Moreover, in this case, it seems to me that the only possible
justification for using the product is the commercial support (or, maybe,
an install process that is so easy that no support is required), as
W32Time undermines it at the low end, and especially as the marketing hype
gives no hint that it implements NTP as againt SNTP, the free reference
implementation is more capable for users requiring real performance.
It had a use on 16 bit Windows, which wasn't a suitable platform for
the reference implementation.

I suppose what might be wanted here is a GUI front end to ntpdc and ntpq,
or rather their corresponding control packets.  Doing GUI frontends tend
to be what commercial suppliers are good at, rather than doing the core

> you can turn to other resources and ask for other help. There's no

Although you will probably be told to use Microsoft's bundled software
or the, free, reference implementation.

Incidentally, in relation to the recent security threads, the hype does
make a positive feature of being both client and server.

Note that for all but the latest version of Windows, W32Time is a broken
SNTP, but it is still good enough for people with simple requirements.

More information about the questions mailing list