Windows Server vs. Linux.
There are some serious errors in this..i’ll address them inline.
Text below:
Windows Server vs. Linux
by Ellen Messmer
June 8, 2010 —
Which is better? Microsoft Windows Server or open-source Linux?
This debate arouses vehement opinions, but according to one IT consultant who spends a lot of time with both Windows and Linux, it’s a matter of arguing which server OS is the most appropriate in the context of the job that needs to be done, based on factors such as cost, performance, security and application usage.
7 Open Source innovations
“With Linux, the operating system is effectively free,” says Phil Cox, principal consultant with SystemExperts. “With Microsoft, there are licensing fees for any version, so cost is a factor.” And relative to any physical hardware platform, Linux performance appears to be about 25% faster, Cox says.
That’s at a minimum. It’s often much higher. Windows server core is an attempt to regain some of that base speed by jettisoning the gui.
Combine that with the flexibility you have to make kernel modifications, something you can’t do with proprietary Windows, and there’s a lot to say about the benefits of open-source Linux. But that’s not the whole story, Cox points out, noting there are some strong arguments to be made on behalf of Windows, particularly for the enterprise.
For instance, because you can make kernel modifications to Linux, the downside of that is “you need a higher level of expertise to keep a production environment going,” Cox says, noting a lot of people build their own packages and since there are variations of Linux, such as SuSE or Debian, special expertise may be needed.
Windows offers appeal in that “it’s a stable platform, though not as flexible,” Cox says. When it comes to application integration, “Windows is easier,” he says.
Windows most assuredly is NOT easier. by the time you get to managing patches, default configuration tweaking, the layers of security you have to pile on to have a prayer of a chance to NOT get compromised…Linux is MUCH easier. I can turn up a Linux server from ground zero to the base install in under an hour WITHOUT USING AN IMAGE. Updates? One run and one reboot..Windows? It’ll be multiples of each…it goes on and on and on.
Windows access control “blows Linux out of the water,” he claims. “In a Windows box, you can set access-control mechanisms without a software add-on.”
He apparently hasn’t heard of chmod and chown. You can do everything you want right from the cli. I tend to use a package called Webmin which is installed from the command line and run from a web browser…i don’t have to pay the Windows gui performance tax.
Patching is inevitable with either Windows or Linux, and in this arena, Cox says that it’s easier to patch Windows. Microsoft is the only source to issue Windows patches. With Linux, you have to decide whether to go to an open-source entity for patches, for instance the one for OpenSSH, or wait until a commercial Linux provider, such as Red Hat, provides a patch.
OR you can use a community variant called Centos(to reference Redhat) which is non-commercial…OR you can use the granddaddy of Linux distros, Debian, who has the basis of many many other distributions. You don’t have to go to openssl because the distros are hooked right into the package vendors. Here’s one point the author missed…speed of patches. Microsoft WON’T patch until there’s an active exploit outside of it’s monthly cycle. Most Linux distros patch within 24 hours of release..24 HOURS..not DAYS or MONTHS…HOURS. Let’s see Microsoft do that…and do it reliably with hosing it’s users systems that have gotten infested due to their continued bad design choices.
Microsoft presents a monolithic single point of contact for business customers, whereas “In Linux, you need to know where to go for what,” which makes it more complicated, Cox says. “There’s no such thing as a TechNet for Linux,” he says. Linux users need to be enthusiastic participants in the sometimes clannish open-source community to get the optimum results.
Oh and Microsofties aren’t clannish? LOL! Let me tell you something..if you don’t drink the Microsoft Kool-aid totally you won’t be in the MS forums and MS evangelists sites..trust me I know about this.
These kind of arguments may indicate why Windows Server continues to have huge appeal in the enterprise setting, though some vertical industries, such as financial firms, have become big-time Linux users.
The only reason Windows keeps hanging around like a fungus is because the third party app vendors have not yet started coding for Linux in large numbers yet…that’s coming. Once folks can see the advantages to Linux MS will have to tighten up their code or die.
Linux and open-source applications are popular in the Internet-facing extranet of the enterprise, Cox notes. And Linux has become a kind of industrial technology for vendors which use it in a wide range of products and services — for instance Amazon’s EC2 computing environment data centers rely on Xen-based Linux servers.
Know why? Security is one, reliability is another, patching is stupid easy(run updates on live system. if no kernel updates no reboot needed..at all). Windows hangs around right now because third party vendors aren’t coding…yet. MS right now does have it’s place and i will recommend windows on the back only when it’s truly necessary. The comments on this article do a far better job of eviscerating the author than I do..:)
