Find the answer to your Linux question:
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 25
Originally Posted by dE_logics ... Anyone who recommends this is either - 1) Bribed by Bill Gates 2) Worship Bill Gates 3) Are too foolish. You need a minimal mount ...
Enjoy an ad free experience by logging in. Not a member yet? Register.
  1. #11
    Linux Newbie glene77is's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Memphis, TN
    Posts
    125

    Smile Servers: Windows vs Linux


    Quote Originally Posted by dE_logics View Post
    ...
    Anyone who recommends this is either -
    1) Bribed by Bill Gates
    2) Worship Bill Gates
    3) Are too foolish. You need a minimal mount of intelligence to administer Linux server... next next next finish wont work here to help the retarded Bill gates fools.
    ...
    G-WAN Apache PHP IIS ASP.Net GlassFish Java Web server software Linux and Windows benchmarks
    ...
    Servlet Performance Report: Comparing Apache Tomcat Performance Across Platforms - Web Performance
    ...
    This ain't software, this's a money making machine.
    ...

    dE_logics,
    Don't know where the little squash about Bill Gates fits into this thread.
    Makes your presentation sound like amateur psychologizing.

    BUT, I did read the listed URLs and noted the even headed testing.
    Good Testing Work at webperformance.com.
    I was not aware that any testing had shown so much differential performance!
    Linux wins, all hands down!

    To borrow from your quote, I would say
    "This ain't about favorites,
    this is a money making machine."

    glene77is---{^,^}---Memphis, TN, USA

  2. #12
    Just Joined!
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    35
    Let me see....
    Oh yeah, if you want to be a slave to the Windows money making machine, then it's MS products.
    If you want an OS with built-in insecurities, then it's MS.
    If you want to pay forever for your computing pleasure, then it's MS.
    If you want an OS that's a constant target for malware, sure, use MS!

    However, if you want your choice(s) of OS flavors that suits your purpose, then it's Linux.
    If you want to unbind yourself from having to pay out of the nose just to use your computer(s), then use Linux.
    If you want quick fixes and updates, then it's Linux.
    If you want an OS that driven by dedicated passion, and not for profit, then it's Linux.
    Everybody loves something for FREE! Most of the time, one doesn't get something for Free. However, Linux is one product that lets you play on a level field with the big boys. It might cost you your time, but not a single dime. Yours to use anyway you choose. No dealing with a license which can be a nuisance.

    Cheers!

  3. #13
    Linux Newbie
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    146
    The OP is having a bad impression. Let's talk about real opinions.

    I honestly feel Windows has one advantage over Linux -- the easy GUI, by that I mean if you got the knowledge (even little bit in some cases) you might get it working, but this has it's own problems -

    1) Since you don't know networking well, the configuration is bad and probability of breaking with time + security issues (really bad ones) increases. In case of network bottlenecks, it's difficult to rectify.
    2) Windows has it's own stability, security and performance problems.
    3) Combination of the above 2 + 1 more, i.e you don't know if it's a windows error, your fault or hardware fault. This can get really nasty; as I see around Windows admins know nothing... they cant get the software to work and then come to the conclusion that the hardware is bad.

    You should know that Windows cant work without antiviruses. I gave my Clients a visualized solution to get some monopolistic applications from Adobe and Sony to work. It had internet access and running without an antivirus. The Windows's (virtual) hard drive had to be restored every 2 or 3 days, cause some problems always occurred. And no, they where not installing software on it, or surfing the internet... it was just minimal usage. Then Windows always slowed down automatically. Anyway, those were Desktop systems.

    The disadvantage of Linux is that it's hard, your networking concepts should be fine if you wanna work on it, and you should at least have 3 or 4 months of experience on a Linux system (and no, it wont be Ubuntu.. something like LFS or Gentoo). Then you'll be at the starting point of Linux administration.
    We do have Linux pros to do the job... but you cant employ a single admin for a handful of servers... he'll be playing around most of the time. Linux hardly gives problems (or in that matter, anything non-Microsoft). A single admin can easily handle 30 systems (assuming static requirements), that too working mostly from home, or other corner of the globe.
    Thus I suggest you hire the 'services' of an admin... he'll do the job on contract basis and go. You call him whenever there's a problem, or when you wanna upgrade (every 2 months on a minimal system).

    Lastly, you'll be using opensource technology, do contribute in some way, it's your software, if you pay for it, not only your software will develop but the world will take advantage of it. A small contribution is multiplied by millions; talk about doing good to humanity

  4. #14
    Just Joined!
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    3
    It's interesting .. how we all can disappear up our own orifice when it comes to platform politics .. and thatís what we are talking about here .. not what is better .. because that is simply be a matter of science and statistics.. but what we think about something .. which is more subjective. I believe for this argument we really need to look at it from the point of view of the lowest common denominator and work our way up, that is to say ~ pretend u know nothing but need a network set-up at home or in the office or wherever, chances are you'll end up with a Microsoft system and it will be for one of several reasons .. Availability - usability - familiarity or simply how or where you get your information and in all of these respects I think we will end up with Microsoft coming out on top. That isn't to say its the best system or the most reliable or economical choice, but simply that Microsoft is the master of marketing /information and salesperson ship. Also from a novices perspective (and we have all been that) if u havenít a clue what your doing the usability of a Microsoft system wins hands down, regardless of how cost effective or reliable or compatible it may or may not be and I would suggest also that dE_Logics comment about the GUI is also relevant. Personally for me Linux wins the day, but if u know NADA then you will find the Microsoft system a simpler solution to get yourself up and running. It's fair to say I think, that Microsoft techi's and network Guru's are ten a penny for the afore mentioned reasons, whereas Linux operatives are a rare commodity (especially those who really know their onions) and so in the case of affordability - staffing a Linux system in some instances may out weigh the cost of the more familiar Microsoft systems (dependant on scale). I would like to add to the discussion also that for me from my early encounters with Linux systems that the inverse snobbery amongst the user base has been / counter productive, that is to say Liny's like to think themselves exclusive or clever or 'smart asses' for want of a better word and this is not something confined to the Linux platform but something I have also experienced amongst Macy's - where as Microsofty's tend to be a little more open and informative and more intent on demystifying than mystifying and this is VERY important, its important because if there is an easy way or a hard way to do something .. then the easy way should be imparted first and then and only then if more information is required (requested) should we go there. I'll give a very simple example of this. Your a new Linux user .. u have lets say Ubuntu and u ask for help.. "how do I install a new desktop theme" ?.. the answer invariably will be sudo this from the terminal sudo that or the other .. root this that or the other etc.. etc.. rarely will you get the answer .. either to allow the package manager to do it .. and if you donít have any luck with that then right click on the desktop choose change desktop background and simply drag and drop your theme into the Appearance preferences panel Ė maybe you think thatís a bad example .. but it isn't.. this is exactly my point .. regardless of what your doing, don't sudo someone if there is a panel or a helper GUI that can do it for them .. and from the point of view of the Linux platform developers .. if there isnít a GUI to do it ?.. why not ?? and this goes back to dE_Logics comment and this is where Microsoft wins and will continue to do so. Knowing how to use your terminal is all well and good, understanding all the ins and outs of networking on Linux is all well and good, but at the end of the day .. Microsoft will always stay in front until such a time as Linux embraces the end user on mass. I expect there are many that don't agree with this .. and more even that would prefer for Linux to remain exclusive .. but for me .. Microsoft is a boil on the face of the software industry and contrary to popular belief - rather than help or forward the communications industry it has to my mind, hindered it and will continue to do so until such a time as another platform takes the initiative and removes the frosty glass from such systems as Linux in order that others can see just how brilliant it really is .. and how we donít need to keep feeding the Microsoft cash cow. Yes .. GUI's .. stupid buttons .. auto set-ups .. auto interrogation etc. .. this is all a pre requisite for success.... in my view : )

  5. #15
    Just Joined!
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Argentina
    Posts
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by Caren View Post
    It's interesting .. how we all can disappear up our own orifice when it comes to platform politics .. and thatís what we are talking about here .. not what is better .. because that is simply be a matter of science and statistics.. but what we think about something .. which is more subjective. I believe for this argument we really need to look at it from the point of view of the lowest common denominator and work our way up
    Ok, so fat so good. I complety agree. But...

    , that is to say ~ pretend u know nothing but need a network set-up at home or in the office or wherever, chances are you'll end up with a Microsoft system and it will be for one of several reasons .. Availability - usability - familiarity or simply how or where you get your information and in all of these respects I think we will end up with Microsoft coming out on top. That isn't to say its the best system or the most reliable or economical choice, but simply that Microsoft is the master of marketing /information and salesperson ship.
    Here is where I disagree. Working our way up is the way to go, for sure. Availability, usability, simplicity and familiarity on the Windows side? Ok, check. But when you say that Microsoft is the master of marketing, you are walking on thin ice... They truly are, of course. But that is the main reason why everybody is so familiar with it. Does that make it the right choise? In my opinion: no, not necesarily. You should first explore your needs, see what's more economic, has the functionality, security and characteristics in general that you need for your work, not what you are most used to. As you well said in the begining: trying to find what's better.

    I'll tell you a short story that might be familiar to many. I've used ICQ as chat client for many years. Anybody knows it? I was so damn happy with it! Well... some day came Window Messanger and then MSN. Pre-installed. Out the box. Everybody started using it and slowly started forgetting about ICQ. All my new friends didn't install any chat client. Why do it when Windows came with one?
    Netscape Navigator rings any bells to you?
    That is "the Microsoft" way. You can call it marketing... I call it monopoly and managing the masses.

    So why suggest Windows because everybody uses it and it's more familiar? I think that is not the way to go. First you must analize what you need to do. Then find the most suitable tool for the task. It can be Linux, or Windows or Unix or Mac. No politics. No zealot wars. Just plain and cold technical analysis.

    Then you continue stating all the things that make Windows more suitable for beginers. Ok, granted. IT IS. But consider this: imagine you have to run and win a race. You have two choises: You can drive the automatic sedan you have parked in your garage that goes from 1 to 100 in 16 seconds. It's easy. It's familiar. It's economic. You will be able to compete. But, of course, you have very little chances to perform well on a race. Or you can learn to drive a manual gearbox racing car. You have never done that. But you can read how it is done, learn and practice. Then your chances of wining, will be much better. It requires more effort, of course! But once you have the skills and the right tool, you can always go back to your familiar sedan to commute. But when you need power and speed, you have your racing car, and you now know how to drive it.

    Options people. You have to know all the options and compre. Do analisys. Cold practical and technical data. That is the way to go. No politcs, love or emotions here. We are talking about technology, aren't we?

  6. #16
    Just Joined!
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    3
    Yes shandrio .. we are - we are talking technology and I do agree with all your points, but my point was not what should be, as per your suggestion. From my perspective its simply what is and technologies and ideas don't always win the day based on what should be - simply, I feel we live in a world where market leaders are just that and more often than not its because they are good at marketing and no .. that does not make it the best choice, its just the choice people make. I made it clear where my loyalties lay and its certainly not with Microsoft and yes also I agree with you that a little effort goes a long way etc. .. I was just trying to get out the idea that the world of 'technology' is driven by market forces and the ability of software companies to market and I was also supporting dE_logics's notion that a GUI is a good marketing tool (my words) and leaves a terminal in the shadows at least as far as the entry level user is concerned - that is of course working on the assumption that this is the 'bulk' of the market .. perhaps I'm wrong in this although it would certainly be fair to say that it would be the case for new users, which are the ones most needing to wake up and smell the platform if Linux is to improve its position. We can preach to the converted all we like, but nodding heads donít make new users.. I'm not a marketing person (thank goodness) so Iím making assumptions based on my own experience. As for "Cold practical and technical data" I cant disagree with that either .. unfortunately its my belief that most consumers would prefer to skip the learning curve - they just want it done and want it done now and Microsoft have in many ways spoiled consumers in this way. Id like to re iterate - my thoughts were not to subtract from what we have in Linux, far from it, but to suggest it could compete better with the likes of Microsoft with respect the entry level user.
    My only exception to your view - of my view O.o .. is that I made no mention of Love or emotions .. although that wd be nice ) .. I would only reinforce my belief that it is about politics in the sense that software, at least at a certain level of sophistication gains or develops a philosophy and the politics is the manner in which the perpetrators/coders - software houses try to establish a market position - I meant it in that sense only ..and with respect to your example of ICQ .. I sincerely rest my case. As for Love and peace I'll leave all that to the Mac fraternity )

  7. #17
    Just Joined!
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by armshount View Post
    Lets say hypothetically that you, (the one reading) is an Network Administrator and IT Consultant. Which would you choose to run all your servers. Would you run Microsoft software or Linux software. I would also request that you tell me why also so that I may understand the reason that you chose that particular OS.

    I am only asking because people belittle and judge Linux too much saying that its unreliable and Windows 2003 server is better. I hate it personally because the GUI takes away valuable Clock cycles and RAM away from the user. I like Linux servers because you can put it to INIT 3 and have just a terminal and still be able to run it like its in INIT 5.. I also like Linux servers because I have 100 percent control over what I want and can do. Windows has a GUI that has preconfigured options by microsoft. Doesnt give you much freedom..

    Please give me your opinions on WIndows and Linux servers..
    I think you answered your own question! personally I would opt for linux its more efficient more secure and being open source you can do so much more with it. More importantly microsoft stuff doesn't do wobbly windows or desktop on a cube (sorry just being childish)

  8. #18
    Just Joined! PrinceSharma's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    /Universe/Earth/India
    Posts
    81
    Our environment includes RHEL plus Sun-Solaris plus IBM-AIX plus holy WinBlows 2003 servers, totaling up to a few hundred.
    I care about Linux and Unix and that's my job, I love that but then at the same time that doesn't mean I hate Windows being in here. They've been serving really good so far, at least since my last 2.5 years in here. So it's all about the affordability, budget and most importantly a long term visibility of the higher management.

  9. #19
    Linux Newbie
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    146
    Maybe someone will make a front end (or report a bug) to the KDE team about a GUI to configure and run apache, samba, vsftpd, ssl etc...

  10. #20
    Penguin of trust elija's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Either at home or at work or down the pub
    Posts
    3,569
    Quote Originally Posted by dE_logics View Post
    Maybe someone will make a front end (or report a bug) to the KDE team about a GUI to configure and run apache, samba, vsftpd, ssl etc...
    Why on Earth would you want to make server management complicated? Use a terminal, it's far simpler
    What do we want?
    Time machines!

    When do we want 'em?
    Doesn't really matter does it!?


    The Fifth Continent

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •