PCMech Forums - View Single Post - Best O/S for a server out of these three...

Statica · 03-10-2003, 01:56 PM

I guess I should stop from trying to get people to consider an overall secure and FAST OS for SERVING DATA. We're talking about a server here guys, where it does matter if there is a hack and it does matter if there is an unplugged exploit and it does matter if there are random BSODs because it is SERVING DATA. This is not your average run of the mill computer that just needs a reboot if a game stops running.

If the reasons as not to use Linux in a server is that its too hard, then perhaps paying someone else a certain amount of $ per month for hosting your data is a better idea. You do not use Linux because its the cool thing to do, and you do not use Linux simply because it is true; it is recommended because it can take more abuse and yet can give you great performance for SERVING DATA. I will not dispute that Windows is a great gaming OS (because all the games are for it) or that its a great desktop OS (because you like it), but its a lot easier to verify the performance of a server in security and in performance, because they can be kept side by side and asked to do the same thing.

Windows 2000 pro is a fine OS, but if the argument was that Win2K can SERVE better than Linux then it might be worth looking into.

Again, I will not get into the Linux vs Windows debate, because it is tired, and because if you can get Windows to be a better (in security, performance, stability, support, ease of configuration ... ) SERVER than Linux then I would consider you a genius from whom I would like to learn 'cos I personally dont get that performance or that stability. and finally, because I dont want this to be considered thread crapping - but in the meantime, I would also suggest in looking into what the shortcomings are, if any, in using a Windows for your server (the fact that you included Windows 98 in your options is why I said my view about Linux).; and also look into comparisons between NT and Linux/UNIX hosting that are available on commercial hosts (that will give u a good idea as well). We have in fact rules on threadcrapping

, that I forgot, not because I wanted to shove some misguided philosophical attitude at you .. but to give you the best option, irrespective of whether it might be hard to learn.

Cheers.

03-10-2003, 01:56 PM	#19
Statica Premium Member Join Date: Jun 1999 Posts: 9,231	I guess I should stop from trying to get people to consider an overall secure and FAST OS for SERVING DATA. We're talking about a server here guys, where it does matter if there is a hack and it does matter if there is an unplugged exploit and it does matter if there are random BSODs because it is SERVING DATA. This is not your average run of the mill computer that just needs a reboot if a game stops running. If the reasons as not to use Linux in a server is that its too hard, then perhaps paying someone else a certain amount of $ per month for hosting your data is a better idea. You do not use Linux because its the cool thing to do, and you do not use Linux simply because it is true; it is recommended because it can take more abuse and yet can give you great performance for SERVING DATA. I will not dispute that Windows is a great gaming OS (because all the games are for it) or that its a great desktop OS (because you like it), but its a lot easier to verify the performance of a server in security and in performance, because they can be kept side by side and asked to do the same thing. Windows 2000 pro is a fine OS, but if the argument was that Win2K can SERVE better than Linux then it might be worth looking into. Again, I will not get into the Linux vs Windows debate, because it is tired, and because if you can get Windows to be a better (in security, performance, stability, support, ease of configuration ... ) SERVER than Linux then I would consider you a genius from whom I would like to learn 'cos I personally dont get that performance or that stability. and finally, because I dont want this to be considered thread crapping - but in the meantime, I would also suggest in looking into what the shortcomings are, if any, in using a Windows for your server (the fact that you included Windows 98 in your options is why I said my view about Linux).; and also look into comparisons between NT and Linux/UNIX hosting that are available on commercial hosts (that will give u a good idea as well). We have in fact rules on threadcrapping , that I forgot, not because I wanted to shove some misguided philosophical attitude at you .. but to give you the best option, irrespective of whether it might be hard to learn. Cheers. Last edited by Statica; 03-10-2003 at 01:59 PM.