Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 56
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    375

    Linux Versus Windows

    I am setting up a small IT company in the UK, I am not an IT expert and will rely on expert staff to actually do the nuts and bolts of the work.

    One question that keeps comming to mind is the Linux Versus Windows.

    Some of the programmers are saying they are not able to work on Linux but they are happy to work with Windows? Is there really such a big difference between the two technologies?

    Linux of course is hugely more inexpensive but even so, is their such a big difference in skill level required?

    Without exception I've been told that Windows is more flexible than Linux. Any opinions or comments?

  2. #2
    Really, it usually comes down to whether there's a specific need for one or the other.

    If you have software requirements based on Windows, then you need Windows, and vice versa for *nix servers.

    I would have thought that Linux is actually the most flexible server environment to work with over Windows - but if your techies say they need to use Windows then I think the decision is made for you.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    540
    Are you asking this question to determine whether your IT company should support Windows or Linux?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    375
    Broadly speaking I'm trying to just learn enough so that I am able to understand the concepts and how much more difficult one is than the other.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    2,734
    For software and an internal network use windows server 2003 or win2k for a webserver however I would use linux

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    540
    I have always determined what OS to use based on what functions I am needing the machine to do or the expertise of those around me. More specifically, if I am setting up an accounting system, there is much more options and support for Windows software. Like markjut said, for webhosting, Linux is becoming the preferred choice among many. I recently came across a company that was perfect for the project I had. Although hosting on Linux would have been less expensive, they were experts in .NET. So I had to go with a Microsoft platform for that project.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    49
    Hi!

    I would personally use Linux because it tends to be more reliable than windows and plus you can keep the plans cheaper because linux is less expensive.

    The only benefit to using windows is that it has some features that some people may like to use, however the same is true for linux.

    So I say: Go with Linux!

    However, since your staff say they can work on windows better, it makes the decision a little bit more complex, and it wouldn't hurt for there to be another windows web host out there.

    -Patrick

  8. #8
    Either will do the job, what's important is what your admin staff can work with. There's no point putting in Linux servers if they can't run them efficiently and securely and visa versa for Windows.

    Find the people first then let them use the skills they bring, don't get hung up on a particular platform.
    Invectis - Windows 2000, 2003 and MS SQL Server web hosting

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    chica go go
    Posts
    11,858
    Linux is going to save you alot of money, but you're going to have to learn how to use the command line.

    Command line isn't that hard, if i can learn it, anybody can.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Saint Cloud, MN
    Posts
    16
    Lots of good help guides out there on Linux.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    375
    Originally posted by iblive
    I have always determined what OS to use based on what functions I am needing the machine to do or the expertise of those around me. More specifically, if I am setting up an accounting system
    Hi Iblive, as you say that is my situation as well, as I in the course of my business operations I shall be 100% reliant upon other skill sets I am limited to what skill sets are around me.

    Predominantly we will be building websites for corporate medium sized entities to small businesses and other internet services. It does seem the general consensus amongst technical individuals is that Windows is favored *even* when they have dual abilities.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    375
    Originally posted by invectis
    Either will do the job, what's important is what your admin staff can work with. There's no point putting in Linux servers if they can't run them efficiently and securely and visa versa for Windows.

    Find the people first then let them use the skills they bring, don't get hung up on a particular platform.

    I think that is the policy I shall have to adopt, although the more I find out about linux the more free open source software seems to be around. How that compares to proprietary windows software is a different matter

    Thanks for the advice invectis

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Under Your Skin
    Posts
    5,875
    If you go to the High Street and walk in any book store with a computer section, you can sit for hours and learn on each product.

    Linux is NOT more reliable than windows... just make sure you install Windows 2003... and update every time it is needed.
    Windows 10 to Linux and Mac OSX: I'm PARSECs better than you. Eat my dust!!!

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    120
    I would think that both of them are not 100% secure. There is a need for proactive patching and monitoring. As for windows, the outstanding point is that the support is faster and professional is standby to help of course $.

  15. #15
    IMO, Linux is more stable than Windows and is perfect for webservers

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    375
    Interesting point regarding linux *not* being more reliable than windows. Why is it commonly stated that this is the case?
    In my position I need to know just enough information needed in order to make executive decisions, I can easily get bogged down in too much knowledge and try to go too deep into issues. Especially where technology is concerned.

    Books can be very useful but it is important to be able to find the right information when needed.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    St. Louis, MO
    Posts
    2,508
    IMO, Linux is more stable than Windows and is perfect for webservers
    Not true at all. We have many Windows web servers that have been more stable that other Linux web servers.

    Bottom line, it's about knowing how to use and secure it. I have said this time and time again, the OS is only as good as the admin.

    Why do people say Linux is more stable than Windows? Here are my guesses.
    1. Because people know how to point and click and use Windows 2000, they think they are a Windows server "admin". Not true at all.
    2. MS releases a few hot fixes/security updates a month. You have to keep up with them to keep the server secure.

    Hope that helps!
    Mike @ Xiolink.com
    http://www.xiolink.com 1-877-4-XIOLINK
    Advanced Managed Microsoft Hosting
    "Your data... always within reach"

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    6,984
    I dun think Linux is free while Windows is super expensive. A lot boils down to what you are running. Initially Linux and associated software is free, but as and when you grow u will find that u need to customised more and more. Cost of this must be compared to cost of Microsoft. There is no 100% which is cheaper or better , it depends a lot on what u need , how you expect to grow.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    375
    In *general*, most people seem to say that linux is definitely more stable. I don't know why, this is not to do with being less vulnerable to virus attack, the simple explanation that it is not so vulnerable to virus attack is that it is not such a *target* as windows. My understanding is that it is more stable from a general user point of view.

    I think the proof of the pudding is here in my own sad *windows 98* system, that every day I have to reboot it at least once, whereas if it was a linux system it would not need to be rebooted.

    In fact windows operating systems naturally deteriorate and destruct do they not? Perhaps we can get some more expert input from any of the techies on this forum?

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    St. Louis, MO
    Posts
    2,508
    I think the proof of the pudding is here in my own sad *windows 98* system, that every day I have to reboot it at least once
    Comparing 98 to Windows server is like comparing an Yugo to a Porche. It' s apples and oranges!

    Suggestion, move to at least Windows 2000 pro. You will only need to reboot a couple of times per year!
    Mike @ Xiolink.com
    http://www.xiolink.com 1-877-4-XIOLINK
    Advanced Managed Microsoft Hosting
    "Your data... always within reach"

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    375
    I know I know, but as I am not doing the designing I don't need to run the high memory demand graphics software and so as I still have a pentium 2 computer ( no sniggers please at the back!!) the windows 98 does me fine, in fact did you know that the biggest number of users in the world still use Windows 98 SE *I think* no doubt someone will come and tell me I'm wrong

    My brother is supposed to be sending me his old copy of windows 2000 though so I hope that it will work ok on a pentium 2, pc.

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Atlanta, Georgia, USA
    Posts
    208
    Most people tend to stick with that which is comfortable to them. My entire business is run on Unix-like systems. The servers are running Linux and FreeBSD and I am personally running FreeBSD as my laptop OS.

    Frank
    AtlantaWebHost.com, a service of Rietta Solutions
    Web Site & Development Hosting, Dedicated, Colocation, DNS, Atlanta-area T1 for Voice & Data

  23. #23
    For some reason I have always preferred using linux, I think it's a much better platform along with better tools.

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    127.0.0.1
    Posts
    70

    Re: Linux Versus Windows

    Originally posted by Tanuk
    I am setting up a small IT company in the UK, I am not an IT expert and will rely on expert staff to actually do the nuts and bolts of the work.

    One question that keeps comming to mind is the Linux Versus Windows.

    ............. edited for length

    Check this site out. I think it offers up some good info on either OS. Not to start a "vs" war, I just thought he might get some advice out of it

    http://kirch.net/unix-nt/

    Regards,
    Deffy

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    375
    Oh no, not at all, nobody is talking about a *war* But in fact it is quite a serious issue.

    I am deeply fascinated by the potential of open source freeware.

    Just check out the costs of My SQL database compared to the costs of MS SQL, now I do not know how to program either, but I know how to analyze the cost and do a comparison of what the actual job of each can produce in temrs of meeting a customers requirements and I would assume the cost of MS SQL is alot more ?

    In fact this entire debate about linux versus windows is talked about every week in all the top IT periodicals in the world Very important topic me thinks. Thanks for the link.

    I'm absolutely certain of the cost differential, this is prooven beyond any doubt in the market prices of windows versus linux.

    My consenus so far is the following

    1. Linux is *probably* more stable but not necessarily
    2. Linux is *definitely* more inexpensive.
    3. Linux requires a higher skill level in order to utilise the technology.

    I appreciate any feedback, of course these are my own general feelings from observations and remember I'm not an expert so I am still *learning*

  26. #26
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Nova Scotia, Canada
    Posts
    4,126
    The topic will never be resolved.

    Why? because there's too many variables. Windows is better in some scenarios, and Linux in others.

    However, 2 points to make perfectly clear:

    1: linux is NOT more stable than Windows
    2: Windows is NOT more stable than linux.

    A system is as stable is it's owner(s)/operator(s).

    Simon
    EIRCA Ltd, home of The Genius Network.

  27. #27
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Under Your Skin
    Posts
    5,875
    Originally posted by Tanuk

    I think the proof of the pudding is here in my own sad *windows 98* system, that every day I have to reboot it at least once, whereas if it was a linux system it would not need to be rebooted.

    lol... you can't even compare windows 98 to Windows XP... let alone the server editions....
    Windows 10 to Linux and Mac OSX: I'm PARSECs better than you. Eat my dust!!!

  28. #28
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    375
    I asked you *not* to laugh or *snigger* thats unkind! and mean of you My poor Windows 98SE does a handsome job. In many ways it is more stable than other versions of windows did you know this? So please put that in your jolly old pipe and *smoke it* old bean!!

  29. #29
    in fact did you know that the biggest number of users in the world still use Windows 98 SE
    I fact most Internet users prefer Win XP, and Win 98SE and Win 2000 go after it according the popularity

  30. #30
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bulgaria
    Posts
    159
    Linux is definately more stable than windows under high load conditions.
    Solid-Hosting.net - affordable multiple domain hosting solutions
    Reliability and Customer Service are our focus!

  31. #31
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    1,274
    Linux def
    hm what should I put in my sig?

  32. #32
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    6,984
    I still prefer Windows, I feel maybe the previous versions give it bad publicity, but the later versions 2k, 2k3 etc really very good. Even when I was running Win95 I dun have much problem. But Win NT different case......

  33. #33
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    375
    Which is the windows server that is the most problematic? Is it Windows NT

  34. #34
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    632
    Well, NT's older, so it's more likely to have bugs in the system. There were a variety of NT versions, so saying Windows NT is the bad one is essentially saying Windows Pre-2000 is the bad pick. I'd stick with Windows Server 2003 if you must, 2000 if you *really* have to.
    Former owner of A Small Orange
    New owner of <COMING SOON>

  35. #35
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    6,984
    Windows 2000 is ok, quite stable if u patch regularly and maintain it.
    NT is so fantastic there is even a famous "Blue Screen" coined after it when it crashes. I still have shivers down my spine when I thought of it. Win NT 4.0 anyone still using? I know of a guy that swear by NT 4.0 he LOVE it. Windows 2003 is good, waiting anxiously for Long Horn.

    Waiting for the day, when Bill Gates decide, alright I am too rich, lets make Windows Open source and free hehe

  36. #36
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    338
    Now we bring NT 4.0 into the discussion... (about how people think it sucks)
    - I will repeat what has been said before in this thread.
    Choose a OS that your System Admins want. In the end it is them, not the users of this forum, that are going to be admin'ing those boxes.

    -As for your questio about NT4, no its not problematic. It just took a special type person to know how to work with it. Same goes for all of this. I imagine without the right knowledge in some flavor of *nix I could get it to do the *nix "Blue Screen" equivalent.
    -The reason you hear more about problems with running windows is A) the mass amount of people using it. B) The majority of those people are home users, that have not a clue how to run a computer. Put one of them on hell even a Red Hat box with some GUI environment. Bet they run into issues with it as well? sure they would........

    Main Point Does not matter what operating system you have/run, it matters on how well your employees are trained with that OS.

    Again,
    Choose a OS that your System Admins want. In the end it is them, not the users of this forum, that are going to be admin'ing those boxes.
    Last edited by Cope; 04-22-2004 at 11:37 AM.

  37. #37
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    375
    I would strongly disagree with anybody who tries to imply that all OS are the same or that all equiptment is the same, this is very very untrue, not just in computer circles but in life, in the universe in just about any applicatoin you care to imagine or any mechanical device there is allways quality models and inferior models...

    Cars/computers/furniture/electrical goods.

    *all things are not created equal*

    In my humble opinion

  38. #38
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Nova Scotia, Canada
    Posts
    4,126
    Originally posted by Yassi
    Linux is definately more stable than windows under high load conditions.
    Not true.

    Windows has as much capability as unix under high stress levels. Now, it can depend on what are the causes of those stress levels.

    Stress levels/loads can be misinterpreted by many people. For instance, a large mail queue on a qmail mail server can cause high loads... that doesn't mean it's unstable. However, there's lots of ways to crash any system,. be it Win, or *nix

    I will restate my point: neither is more stable than the other. Trust me, we've been doing this for more than a few weeks.

    As someone pointed out, it can depend on your admin/admin team.

    For instance, 3 years ago, most new windows technicians were hopped up *nix guys who thought they could do both.. big mistake.

    Each one is a beast unto it's self. I wouldn't ask our windows guys what was wrong with a box running fedora core 1, and the same would go in reverse. If you have the machines, and the correct setup, properly maintainted, I would literally say none is more stable than the other, in almost any environment.

    Simon
    EIRCA Ltd, home of The Genius Network.

  39. #39
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bulgaria
    Posts
    159
    Originally posted by IHSL
    Not true.

    Windows has as much capability as unix under high stress levels. Now, it can depend on what are the causes of those stress levels.

    Stress levels/loads can be misinterpreted by many people. For instance, a large mail queue on a qmail mail server can cause high loads... that doesn't mean it's unstable. However, there's lots of ways to crash any system,. be it Win, or *nix

    I will restate my point: neither is more stable than the other. Trust me, we've been doing this for more than a few weeks.

    As someone pointed out, it can depend on your admin/admin team.

    For instance, 3 years ago, most new windows technicians were hopped up *nix guys who thought they could do both.. big mistake.

    Each one is a beast unto it's self. I wouldn't ask our windows guys what was wrong with a box running fedora core 1, and the same would go in reverse. If you have the machines, and the correct setup, properly maintainted, I would literally say none is more stable than the other, in almost any environment.

    Simon
    Under high load I meant heavy website traffic. Windows just uses too much resources. Say you have two high traffic web sites, one hosted on linux server, the other on windows. The linux server will show better performance and stability than the windows server. ( Given the server hardware is the same)
    Solid-Hosting.net - affordable multiple domain hosting solutions
    Reliability and Customer Service are our focus!

  40. #40
    linux for security & windows for easy management
    -Tyler

    http://www.beauxbatonsonline.com
    [email protected]

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
  •