August 8th, 2001, 03:48 PM
What's the difference between Linux and WindowsNT servers?
I'm surfing this hosting site and they offer four hosting options. The first three are all linux servers and the last, the most expensive one, has a WindowsNT server. What's the big difference between Linux and WIndowsNT? Since all those Linux servers are cheaper than the WindowsNT one, I thought of buying the Linux option...Or does it have bad charasteristics etc.?
August 10th, 2001, 02:14 PM
I know almost nothing about the differences, except there's one thing I've learned along the way;
apparently if you want to use ASP, which is microsoft's language of choice, you have to use Windows NT. No one else really likes using Windows, because it's finicky and unstable (go figure) from what I've heard.
Let's put the fun back
August 10th, 2001, 02:37 PM
If you're looking for a server, use linux, it's a lot better.
August 10th, 2001, 03:10 PM
Thanks for the replies people, I talked to a friend yesterday and he told me the advantages of WindowsNT. And WinNT is A LOT better than Linux. You don't need to chmod files, no difference between ascii and binary modes...that kicks ***...That's why it's more expensive.
August 10th, 2001, 05:07 PM
Bull****. The reason it's more expensive, is because the general populus hasn't come to the realization that you don't always have to pay for something in order to get quality. Linux and most of the software that runs on it is free. Microsoft products cost money, therefore the hosting provider has to charge you more to offer that "service". This community is a shining example of this concept (that you don't always have to pay to get quality) and a model image of how the Open Source community helps its members. Microsoft has capitalized on this exact gullibility of the corporate world by charging exuberant prices for its software, that have been proven time and time again to be extremely unstable, unsecure, and poorly written. Gee, why does it seem that all these viruses that have been in the spotlight recently just happen to exploit security flaws in Microsoft software? Hmm... I don't know... maybe that has something to do with it?
Case in point: <http://www.info-sec.com/OSsec/OSsec_080498g_j.shtml>
With a Linux server, you can telnet from any computer on the Internet and access 100% of the potential of the server, limited only by your access restrictions (or ingenuity). With Windows (of any kind), you can only do this with something like PC Anywhere. Sure, there are telnet daemons for Windows, but you can't run most of the current Windows apps in "DOS mode", unlike the various Unices that inherently allow you to do this (for free, I might add).
No, you don't have to chmod in the Windows world. You do have to walk in front of the box, right click on the folder, and set it's permissions, though. What's the difference? ...other than the fact that in the Windows environment, you're going to be hard pressed to do that remotely, unless you have access to do it through an FTP client?
Then again, you probably aren't looking for the truth on which is better, and just trolling for a holy OS war to see how high you can get the posts.
August 12th, 2001, 01:02 PM
Also chmodin' is easy, and the binary ASCII has never caused me a headache
All you need is the right FTP proggie, and it will practically do it for you.
GO WITH LINUX- STABILITY IS NO 1.
August 12th, 2001, 03:10 PM
Point made, didn't know why WindowsNT is more expensive so thanks for the asnwer, now I'll know. I know that M$ and its products suck I just wondered maybe NT is lotsa better than Linux if they charge you more money...but that's not true.
Wait a minute, I didn't know that you still need to set the permissions of the files, folders. Actually right clicking and setting the permission sucks, it's not handy, I'd better use an FTP program for that.
Oh YES, I posted this in order to understand why NT is more expensive and where the heck did you get the idea that I posted that for an OS war and many posts in this thread?
Anyway, thanks for clearing things up here. Now I know it 100% - M$ sucks.
Last edited by Justas G; August 12th, 2001 at 03:12 PM.
August 12th, 2001, 03:12 PM
Previous experiences. The tone of your post smelled of that.
August 26th, 2001, 09:08 AM
Holy OS War
I shouldn't post this, but I just have to since I just finished watching Monty Python.
If there's a Holy OS War, where would be the best place to set up a little dual function stand. On one side I'll sell Penguins, little devils and the like, on the other side I'll sell Gates dolls that are semi automated, they listen to your ideas, stab you in the back when you're not looking, steal your cash when your down, market your idea as their own and then charge you to call 911.
Sorry, had to post that, it's just such a funny visual.
Absolute Impressions, Inc.
August 26th, 2001, 02:24 PM
the value of chmod
chmod is just one example of where unices are superior to windoze...
the point is security... chmod gives you the power to control access to files and directories based on who owns them.
windoze has no such ability...