:twisted: I am currently carrying out a survey in to the pros and cons of deploying the latest versions of windows, novell netware and linux 'Red Hat'. The problem is cutting through the vendors hype. Although windows seem to hold the lions share of the market, all my findings seem to point to the fact that Windows version leads to a greater Total Cost of Ownership. any thoughts or comments. Cheers Andy
Re: Server operating systems
15 years 3 weeks ago #2193
Well as far as TCO goes, everyone will tell you different things.. in fact you'll find a couple of surveys which states that Microsoft has a lower TCO.. rest assured, Microsoft 'sponsors' these <sarcasm> objective investigations </sarcasm>
As a student of economics (gasp! yes I am), I can tell you that when it comes to monetary economics, you cannot compete with the magic word 'free', however you'll obviously want to factor in things like support.. something that is getting better in the Open Source world.. downtime... something that is getting worse in the Windows world.
When it comes to servers, I say Linux.. workstations.. I say Windows. This is based on the fact that Microsoft servers are more crash prone, less secure, and require more maintainance than Linux servers. You set up a Penguin box once, and then concentrate on becoming a grandfather and retiring.. it will stay there.
I have not had the pleasure of dealing with RedHat support, but from all accounts, the redhat network is something they take very seriously.
If anyone wants to argue with me about Windows v/s Linux server uptimes, please don't bother... I will cut short all your arguements with the simple fact that everytime you hotfix or patch a Windows box you have to reboot it, if you're not rebooting your windows boxes, that means you're not patching them.. and excuse me for saying so, you're a moron. If anyone still insists on being belligerent with me, kindly look at the following, and tell me if you see a Windows box in there anywhere :
Its a serious bitch about Redhat.. though I kinda saw that coming when they announced that they weren't gonna focus on the desktop market.
However, there's still Debian, Openlinux, Slackware and a variety of other distros for free. Not to mention FreeBSD if thats your thing.
More and more Linux vendors are gonna jump off the free bandwagon when it comes to the enterprise, simply because corporations aren't giving enough back in other ways. Either way, 'cheaper' will start to become a more appropriate word at least in the enterprise server OS category.
The reason for that is people want the tech support.. and the Linux vendors can't provide that support without charging for it. Thats why in most cases -- RedHat included.. you have the option.. its free for you if you don't want the support.
These are supple times.. with IBM backing Linux in a big way, and the sudden realisation that this just might be a viable alternative to Microsoft, people are experimenting with the best way to get Linux onto servers and get more serious recognition from the Corporations. All I'm hoping is that it will turn out with a breaking of the largest monopoly in the history of the world. The competition will be make things better for Microsoft customers as well. Drive down prices, increase the quality of the software.. more R&D. Its a good thing.
And maybe when Microsoft finds revenue is down will decide to spin off its horribly loss-making segments (like the Xbox) and be forced to pour those billions of dollars into OS development.