Linus Torvalds gives Windows 7 a big thumbs up

Jordus said:

Nor does anyone care who linus torvalds is.

I beg to differ with you. I certainly care. His kernel powers more of my servers than that coming out of Redmond.

There is no need to argue over which is better. I think the best server is dependent upon the need at hand. I know there are a ton of SQL Servers and Exchange Servers obviously running on Windows and there are a ton of Apache, mysql, bind, and sendmail servers running on Linux.

For example, if you run a hosting facility and host Windows applications it's quite obvious that you probably would run a ton of Citrix boxes on Windows. Everything is really dependent upon the need.

My shop uses quite a number of Linux servers to host LDAP, Apache, Tomcat, Exim, MySQL, FTP and a variety of other web services. The reason we use Linux is stability, ease of setup and administration and extremely low cost.

KazeNoKoe23 said:

sup3rsprt said:

The only reason he gives a thumbs up is because those are all pirated copies of Windows 7. After all, it is Japan.

You're thinking of China.

China might MAKE them but India and Pakistan is where you can BUY them almost in any Bazaar. Can't beat those guys for their selling skills.

'Psst - want a copy of MS SQL server, Exchange server, Complete SAP ERP system with BI and portals, IBM mainframe OS'es etc etc --- 35 USD the lot- cash only on unmarked DVD's so no probs taking them on the plane home' .

BTW Apache and MySQL run quite happily on Windows as does Tomcat

For the first two -- WAMP -- is the equivalent in Windows of LAMP in Linux, (Windows/Linux Apache MySQL Php) and a common system using Tomcat in Windows is vmware server version 2.


Cheers
jimbo

"But in the end Linus surprisingly did not buy a copy. Wise man!"

That's because he pre-ordered his! ;-)

Anyway, how long before we see "I'm a Linux (or Penguin) and I'm a PC" commercials?

Jordus said:

I think Server 2008 will start dispelling the "unstable" reputation of windows server. I installed many 2008 servers back in june and they havnt so much as hiccuped since.

I don't think that Windows servers are really regarded as unstable. Windows 2000 was good and 2003 has been solid as a rock.

jimbo45 said:

BTW Apache and MySQL run quite happily on Windows as does Tomcat

While they can run quite happily on Windows...the real question is whether it's advantageous to do this. Overwlemingly I say NO...because of 1). cost of Windows licensing (Hundreds of dollars per box) 2). overhead of Windows versus linux 3). installed footprint on the server. (10GB+ for Windows Server, 1.5GB or less usually for Linux) 4). Ease of administration...with Linux it's just a couple of text files which contain the entire configuration of Apache, MySQL and Tomcat. Copy them over and you are done...none of that clicking here and clicking there and choosing this and choosing that. 5). ability to use tools like grep, awk and tail...which are all invaluable as a server admin trying to parse logs and gather information.

With a virtual server, i can run quite a few more Linux hosts than I can with Windows on the same server because the memory requirements are lower and the hard drive footprint is about 70% less.