Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!
Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!
-
Congratulations Rhinorhino on being selected by the Tek-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
Comparision of Linux and Windows 2k ?
- Thread starter Johnthom
- Start date
I have not used linux for years and years.... but I have recently been looking into it as a platform for internet security, here are a few things I have found you might be interested in
a: Linux is open-source, and you can get it for free as opposed to paying loads for Win2k
b: As it is open-source, improvements are made constantly,
and the OS is stable/reliable - lots of people say even more so than Win2k!
c: It is based on Unix, the OS itself runs on more platforms than Win2k can (i.e Alpha, Intel). It supports SMT which allows multi-processor PC's to make more efficient use of resources, forgive me if I'm wrong, but I think only Win2k DataCenter Server allows SMT.
d: Although Linux can be downloaded for free, I have heard time and time again that RedHat Linux (not free) is ideal, mainly because you get more support, but also because it is supplied with tons and tons of stuff... Because the OS is open-source, there are loads of different versions out there, you would want to purchase a copy (not neccesarily RedHat but..) and get it on CD.
Linux doesn't use NTFS partitions but Linux has a file-system which works along the same lines, keeping user files secure
Linux runs a multi-session environment, which means 10 users could be logged onto the SAME machine.
Ultimately, Linux is more flexible and configurable than other OS's - but it's a leap as it bears little resemblance to any of MS's offerings, If you do make the switch be prepared to learn from scratch.
Experience working in a CLI environment would be most helpful. Most things are done there.
Linux can be secured, and is secure enough to use on the Web, lots of servers run on Linux platforms, so I would suppose you can tighten security just as much as on a MicroSoft platform.
I reckon MicroSoft adds too many bells and whistles to it's OS's in order to make it easier for the end-user, not the administrator. Linux is the other way round. If you are thouroughly PC literate and if Linux likes you, it is more streamlined, powerful, and nowhere near as many overheads to slow your PC down.
Hope some of this helps???
a: Linux is open-source, and you can get it for free as opposed to paying loads for Win2k
b: As it is open-source, improvements are made constantly,
and the OS is stable/reliable - lots of people say even more so than Win2k!
c: It is based on Unix, the OS itself runs on more platforms than Win2k can (i.e Alpha, Intel). It supports SMT which allows multi-processor PC's to make more efficient use of resources, forgive me if I'm wrong, but I think only Win2k DataCenter Server allows SMT.
d: Although Linux can be downloaded for free, I have heard time and time again that RedHat Linux (not free) is ideal, mainly because you get more support, but also because it is supplied with tons and tons of stuff... Because the OS is open-source, there are loads of different versions out there, you would want to purchase a copy (not neccesarily RedHat but..) and get it on CD.
Linux doesn't use NTFS partitions but Linux has a file-system which works along the same lines, keeping user files secure
Linux runs a multi-session environment, which means 10 users could be logged onto the SAME machine.
Ultimately, Linux is more flexible and configurable than other OS's - but it's a leap as it bears little resemblance to any of MS's offerings, If you do make the switch be prepared to learn from scratch.
Experience working in a CLI environment would be most helpful. Most things are done there.
Linux can be secured, and is secure enough to use on the Web, lots of servers run on Linux platforms, so I would suppose you can tighten security just as much as on a MicroSoft platform.
I reckon MicroSoft adds too many bells and whistles to it's OS's in order to make it easier for the end-user, not the administrator. Linux is the other way round. If you are thouroughly PC literate and if Linux likes you, it is more streamlined, powerful, and nowhere near as many overheads to slow your PC down.
Hope some of this helps???
While I agree with most of what the previous poster stated, let me add a few comments.
1) Win2K server does support Multiple processors.
2) Security is better, but that's because most hackers aren't putting as much effort into Unix boxes as they are Windows ones. Once they set their sights on Unix there will be many attacks on it as well. There are still numerous well publicized attacks on Unix boxes as well.
3) There are so few real-world software programs available that it precludes me using it. Once they have 20,000+ real software packages available it will be a viable solution.
W2K is secure on the web when set up properly and secured against attack. You also must make sure that you apply the security patches when they come out to make sure that you are up-to-date on the security risks. Microsoft makes it alot easier though by allowing your server to notify you of security updates needed when you install the update notification on the machine.
All in all, linux is a good server platform for many things, especially as a web server or ftp server, but as for it being a SQL server or a reliable, fast and easy application and user server, it's not there yet.
-Jason Hand
1) Win2K server does support Multiple processors.
2) Security is better, but that's because most hackers aren't putting as much effort into Unix boxes as they are Windows ones. Once they set their sights on Unix there will be many attacks on it as well. There are still numerous well publicized attacks on Unix boxes as well.
3) There are so few real-world software programs available that it precludes me using it. Once they have 20,000+ real software packages available it will be a viable solution.
W2K is secure on the web when set up properly and secured against attack. You also must make sure that you apply the security patches when they come out to make sure that you are up-to-date on the security risks. Microsoft makes it alot easier though by allowing your server to notify you of security updates needed when you install the update notification on the machine.
All in all, linux is a good server platform for many things, especially as a web server or ftp server, but as for it being a SQL server or a reliable, fast and easy application and user server, it's not there yet.
-Jason Hand
time to throw my 2 cents in
I agree with allot of what the above post have stated but they left out of a couple of things.
Is tech support Free NO it actual just as expensive as Microsoft tech support. I’m referring to Red Hat’s tech support options.
Is it user friendly NO.
To support it; you have to know C, C++, Python, and how to compile the latest hot fix.
Bug reporting and finding out about bugs is a pain. You have to learn to love News Groups and read about 10,000 plus websites.
Could the end user use it? NO.
Is it close to being Windows? NO.
The Finical status of all the various Linux Distribution Companies is not good. Read over the balance sheets and ask the question, is this company going to be here in 2 years.
Linux is starting to suffer from splintering in some areas. Desktop is the best example KDE verses GNOME. This will make support a pain in the future.
On the Server side of Linux is equal to Windows in most areas concerning 25 or less servers.
Is Linux as Fast as Windows?
NO, MS now holds a place in the top 5 in allot of industry Benchmark tests, where is Linux.
Linux’s Symmetrical Multi-Processing support is not very good
Clustering is a pain. The Application has to be design from the ground up to Support Linux’s 2 major implantations of Clustering.
On the client side where all the real work is done Data entry and the like, Linux is so far behind it is not even funny.
I agree with allot of what the above post have stated but they left out of a couple of things.
Is tech support Free NO it actual just as expensive as Microsoft tech support. I’m referring to Red Hat’s tech support options.
Is it user friendly NO.
To support it; you have to know C, C++, Python, and how to compile the latest hot fix.
Bug reporting and finding out about bugs is a pain. You have to learn to love News Groups and read about 10,000 plus websites.
Could the end user use it? NO.
Is it close to being Windows? NO.
The Finical status of all the various Linux Distribution Companies is not good. Read over the balance sheets and ask the question, is this company going to be here in 2 years.
Linux is starting to suffer from splintering in some areas. Desktop is the best example KDE verses GNOME. This will make support a pain in the future.
On the Server side of Linux is equal to Windows in most areas concerning 25 or less servers.
Is Linux as Fast as Windows?
NO, MS now holds a place in the top 5 in allot of industry Benchmark tests, where is Linux.
Linux’s Symmetrical Multi-Processing support is not very good
Clustering is a pain. The Application has to be design from the ground up to Support Linux’s 2 major implantations of Clustering.
On the client side where all the real work is done Data entry and the like, Linux is so far behind it is not even funny.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Question
- Locked
- Question
- Locked
- Question