On Thu, 15 May 2003, David Fokkema wrote:
> Hi group,
>
> I'm not looking for a flamewar, nor do I want this thread to become an
> outlet for all kinds of ass* opinions. I am being very serious about
> this. Really.
>
> So, apparantly, apache holds about 60 percent of the internet server
> market and microsoft's iis only about 30. Furthermore, apache is faster,
> more stable and more secure. Furthermore, un*x (with for example qmail)
> can handle more mails per day with a lower system load and fewer (read
> none) mails are being lost. Basically, un*x (or just the BSDs and linux)
> is faster, more stable and more secure. AND free. Or so I am led to
> believe...
>
> According to www.unixsucks.com (why did I go there in the first place?),
> which has a lot of reference links, this is all not true. I could've LOLed,
> flamed this guy and ignored his site, but I didn't. I looked up the
> references. I'm particularly bothered about the Fortune 1000 net survey
> and the mindcraft benchmark of redhat vs winnt. I read the whole story,
> they did three tests. And what's more, win2000 seems to be stable.
>
> Any thoughts on this? Or (perhaps) better, a site with a lot of
> reference links which 'proves' the opposite?
Windows doesn't suck. A lot of linux users believe that it should, but
it doesn't. It supports a ton of hardware, the 2k/XP line is very
stable (as long as you don't tend to install a ton of crap), and the
default installations are becoming more and more secure. If you want to
setup a vanilla network service (such as email), Windows tends to be
easier then linux. From a dumb user perspective, Windows is easier then
linux.
As for IIS vs Apache, for serving static content, I believe both can
flood rather large internet connections rather easily. Dynamic content
(asp, php, perl, etc) is a different story, and those tests can be
rather setup-specific.
The problem with any linux-sucks or windows-sucks website is that both
sides tend to dredge up biased tests and old flaws to "prove" their
points. FUD doesn't fly one way in these debates.
That being said, it might seem a tad curious that I'm posting this with
mutt under debian. Why do I use linux if windows is so good? Several
reasons:
1) Linux/Unix responds a lot better to non-vanilla situations
than windows. My mail system is a case in point, where I am using
several systems on the home network, with scripts to filter and cleanup
spam, and other scripts to syncronize mail (and tagged spam) between
my desktop and my server. Could I do some of that with windows?
Probably on the laptop end, although the server end would end up being a
big PITA. Given enough time and code, I could pull it off, but why take
the extra effort if linux works?
2) Cost and licenses. Keeping track of serial numbers and CDs are not
my idea of fun. Windows XP "phone home" authentication tends to cause
problems, especially for massive upgrades/reinstalls. Also, I can run
an up to date distribution on archaic hardware. My laptop runs woody
just fine, even though its a P166. An 80 gig HDD and a hardware modem
thrown into another P166 works fine for dialup/mail/news/fileserver.
Could I use windows for the same task? Sure, if I upgraded the
hardware. Do I want to pay a few hundred more, just so I can do the
same thing? No.
3) Usefulness. I'm fond of piping simple commands together to filter
files through. I tend to read and manipulate a lot of text files, and
the unix command set is just more useful for me.
4) 3rd party tools. Under windows, 3rd party software is a crapshoot,
its often buggy, crashprone, or tends to break other software. Under
linux, everything with woody just "works". Obscure software I have
to compile from scratch tends to work. I don't worry about software A
breaking software B.
So, why do I use windows if linux is so good?
1) Games: Windows has a wider assortment of games.
2) Legacy software: Some software I use under windows do not have
equivalent linux versions. Some tasks I do have better windows software
then linux software. Also, there is a lot of FOSS apps ported to
windows - Mozilla, gVim, Open Office, Abiword, etc.
3) Finished GUI: The GUI of windows software and the OS seems to be
more finished then linux. A simple example would be how many linux apps
like to maximize so that they are larger then the displayed window
space.
Hope that helps,
~ Jesse Meyer
--
...crying "Tekeli-li! Tekeli-li!"... ~ HPL
icq : 34583382 | === ascii ribbon campaign ===
msn : dasunt@hotmail.com | () - against html mail
yim : tsunad | /\ - against proprietary attachments
Attachment:
pgpFNExT0PUH5.pgp
Description: PGP signature