Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 26
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Posts
    6

    Whats the best OS to have your site hosted on?

    Whats the best OS to have your site hosted on?
    I see that some are cheaper than other and I have seen that windows 2000 cost more than unix for example....

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Posts
    2,611

    Re: Whats the best OS to have your site hosted on?

    It really depends on the needs of your web site really. A lot of people preffer *nix based solutions, ie. Linux. Windows is generally more expensive because the software and licences for software are generally quite expensive. When it comes to linux, most, if not everything regarding software can be found free on the internet, even linux itself.

    I for one have used both and I preffer Linux.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    71
    Microsoft Windows for WorkGroups 3.11
    But seriously, most stable is arguably FreeBSD. I like the features offered with windows hosting more though.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Sirkali Rural Tamilnadu
    Posts
    738
    If security is your prime need go for OpenBSD [not many providers though]

    If application hosting is your pref. [like ASP or MS Access] then Windows is ok

    If choice of control panels and other open source software is your pref Linux wins hands down

    But I prefer FreeBSD as an all round OS that is robust, stable and can be made secure.

    If you are hosting emails then you should see the mail server than the OS

    Cheers
    Balaji
    I am now happily selling Natural Herbal Hair Oil - happy to be so far removed from technology!

  5. #5
    Linux.
    Thomas
    thomas@networkeleven.com
    http://www.networkeleven.com

  6. #6
    FreeBSD is the best I think.

  7. #7
    FreeBSD, Linux, MacOS X or Solaris.

    Unless of course you require the dreaded ASP and Access, in which case you will unfortunately have to go for Windows hosting.
    Hostit365.com - Reliable Web Hosting with magical support
    cPanel #1 Web Hosting Control Panel Included
    WHT members benefit from our industry leading 60 day money back guarantee with no small print
    Now accepting PayPal™ - Click here to order now

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Ann Arbor, MI
    Posts
    2,979
    Linux is the best.

    If you're worried about security, use a firewall in front of the web server running openbsd.
    -Mark Adams
    www.bitserve.com - Secure Michigan web hosting for your business.
    Only host still offering a full money back uptime guarantee and prorated refunds.
    Offering advanced server management and security incident response!

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Posts
    495
    Here are the pros and cons

    Windows 2000 Server / NT
    ---------------------------------
    1) Great ASP / FrontPage support
    2) Insecure
    3) Many add-on programs that cost money
    4) Crappy load handling
    5) Easy to use / configure

    Linux / FreeBSD
    ----------
    1) Free
    2) Secure if you know how to do it
    3) Somewhat hard to configure.. There are control panels that do a lot for you
    4) Great Load Balancing
    5) Awesome uptime - been on boxes with 6 yr uptimes
    James R. Clark II

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    KCMO
    Posts
    80

    * Red Hat

    I might get flammed on this, but I like Red Hat.
    Brently

  11. #11
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    United States of Walmart
    Posts
    687

    brently

    thought that might be you........

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    Cardboard box out behind a gas station in Atlanta, Georgia.
    Posts
    35
    CP/M

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    TEXAS! God bless it.
    Posts
    160
    I prefer the Atari 2400 OS.

    ... But that's just me.
    Matt

  14. #14
    Windows certainly does have a place... I've come across developers who prefer the coldfusion/ms sql combination.

    2k hosting seems to be mainly geared towards those type of developers with specific needs/interests that *nix can not effectively meet.

    Linux is my choice for the standard shared solution.

    Win2k is also about 50 times easier to update and configure. You won't find yourself recompiling IIS anytime soon.
    Thomas
    thomas@networkeleven.com
    http://www.networkeleven.com

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    264
    Originally posted by Thomas.N11
    Win2k is also about 50 times easier to update and configure. You won't find yourself recompiling IIS anytime soon.
    But you will find yourself checking for windows vulnerbility several times a day I feel empty when I checked and didn't find any patches...

    Also... about easier to configure.... hmmmm easier to get lost Easier to stuff up with security settings? Why do you think they release IIS Lock Down tool?? To make it a little easier to change the 100's of places where it can be vulnerable... I think

    But regardless of this the choice comes down to two

    unix
    windows

    if someone needs windows... you can't just use unix... it depends... which comes first

    for Unix, we use all FreeBSD servers, SMP capable (OpenBSD isn't) and more secure, stable (than linux / widows). Just the other day my friend found a bug that has been in Linux kernel and still is in 2.5.x (the development version) you very rarely find a bug in FreeBSD because it is meant for stability whereas Linux (from the kernel up to the o/s tools) are more for experiments for the "new and cool" things..

    you don't want new and cool things on your production servers, you just want it to run reliably
    eat me

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    291
    I perfer FreeBSD, but right now I'm on Linux.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Nahariya, Israel
    Posts
    170
    Experienced and Aware system administrators can run win2k servers with GREAT uptime, Good reliability and excellent security.
    Take maximumasp.com for example.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    264
    I agree to that. Windows *can* be secure as long as you don't mind keeping up with the more frequent patches, and understand its security model. The reason it is harder is because the security is a bit more complex and easy to misconfigure.
    eat me

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    St. Louis, MO
    Posts
    2,508
    Actually, Window's security is pretty easy to configure and understand.

    The way I see it, the big problem is Linux is more secure out of the box than Windows. Windows Server was developed for office type servers where security is not as important. Inexperienced people install it (because of the ease of installation) and don't worry about security because they don't know better. Linux takes a little know-how to install and is not as easy as W2K, so most people who install Linux have more of an understanding for security, etc.

    It only takes about 2 minutes to lock-down a W2K box, probably about the same as a Linux box. The security and stability of an server is a 99% reflection on the admin.

    My 2 cents
    Mike @ Xiolink.com
    http://www.xiolink.com 1-877-4-XIOLINK
    Advanced Managed Microsoft Hosting
    "Your data... always within reach"

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    38
    Your choice depends upon what you need. We currently use freebsd 4.4, but we have encountered a lot of problems when running java servlets, jsps etc. Things may change for freebsd4.5, but until that happens, we are now planning to switch over to linux.
    There are many other factors as well such as security, stability, maturity of multi processor support ....

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    264
    Originally posted by goacom
    Your choice depends upon what you need. We currently use freebsd 4.4, but we have encountered a lot of problems when running java servlets, jsps etc. Things may change for freebsd4.5, but until that happens, we are now planning to switch over to linux.
    Have you had a look at www.freebsd.org/java/ ?

    There are many other factors as well such as security, stability, maturity of multi processor support ....
    I believe FreeBSD excels on these areas a well
    eat me

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Posts
    956

    Re: Red Hat

    Originally posted by brently27
    I might get flammed on this, but I like Red Hat.
    My site is hosted on Red Hat Linux 7.1

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Posts
    956
    Linux

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    264
    For those who like RedHat or Linux.... could you explain why?
    eat me

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Posts
    154

    Re: Whats the best OS to have your site hosted on?

    Originally posted by LordNicon
    Whats the best OS to have your site hosted on?
    I see that some are cheaper than other and I have seen that windows 2000 cost more than unix for example....
    Whatever operating system suits the needs of the site you have developed.
    My answer to the most commonly asked question on WHT:
    Hosting Matters http://www.hostmatters.com
    FutureQuest http://www.futurequest.net

Page 1 of 2 12 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
  •