Never thought it possible...

Nic

No your not crazy And unlucky.

__________________

pelvis_3

Hahahaha, nice analysis there AT.
Definately not crazy though

__________________

Adopt an unanswered thread. | Who's Online | vB Code

Some people are alive only because it’s illegal to kill them!
Support bacteria, it's the only culture some people have!

Anti-Trend

An observation is one thing, being pissed off at an OS being accepted as the standard while there are vastly superior alternatives literally makes me feel insane. I mean, Windows 2003 Server costs a lot of money, performs badly, has atrocious uptime, and yet it's "enterprise ready". Makes perfect sense. (????)

__________________
See My Desktop | Try Linux | Install Linux | Visit My Server | Support Hardware Forums | Easily rip DVDs in Linux | Remember Everything

sabashuali

So why do so many companies and institutes insist on running such a bad OS?

I have no shares in MS and I do not like them more than any other alternative but why is windows the most common OS out there? Surely not because of prices..... Linux is free. What is a serious alternative to Windows Server?

This is a serious question and not a dig.....



I just cannot understand this....

__________________
This is not a PC friendly user!!!
"...when you find someone you really love, all the rest is just... other stuff." - Leanne Anika Battersby

Help with digital video?

Help My Mini City to grow
Hit or Miss

Addis

Because Dell and Apple both have contracts with Intel, Intel are still huge compared AMD and so AMD can't produce the yields to meet demands.

__________________
Never trust a program you don't have the source code for.

My website | Powerful Desktop Linux | Linux for human beings | Linux for power users | Linux for ricers

Fred

Most servers on the internet are running apache web server which is open source, and if I'm not mistaken, running the linux kernel. So people have started to use linux as a server... actually, linux has had a pretty good hold on the server market for some time. It's the desktop environment that linux is really fighting for now.

*edit* ok. I'm dumb. Apache just RUNS on linux... that's what it is. But it's an open source program.

Anti-Trend

Using Linux one can easily setup a Windows File & Print server and/or domain controller by using Samba. The sad thing is that Linux with Samba actually performs ~250% better than an actual Windows server on the same hardware. And obviously you don't have to pay per-client licensing fees like a Windows server. Not to mention not needing an anti-virus subscription and all the other overhead traditionally associated with Windows. Also, UNIX systems like Linux are infinitely easier and more natural to remotely administrate than Windows. So yes, Linux is a serious alternative to Windows on the server. In fact, the sentiment that Windows is a server OS at all is a fairly new one. I think it's just that people know Windows, as they use it on their desktops, so they don't want to learn something new no matter how much better it may be. Even though Linux is free and Windows is pricey, a) they don't know any better, never having worked with anything but Windows and b) they don't want to learn something new.

__________________
See My Desktop | Try Linux | Install Linux | Visit My Server | Support Hardware Forums | Easily rip DVDs in Linux | Remember Everything

Impotence

People use windows beacuse, most of them dont know or have never heard of anything else (except Mac maby).

Beacuse windoze costs alot of money, the have alot of money for advertising and bullying smaller companies (ie all of them).

__________________

StimpE

Well when I first tried linux, one reason I was kind of 'intimidated' I guess was because I did not know all the linux terms and what they meant. I didn't know what GRUB was for the longest time, but if I really think back to when I was like 8, I can remember feeling the same way learning on windows.

I guess windows had me a bit brainwashed o.O

__________________

Big B

Of course x86 architechture isn't the greatest either, but unfortunately, as the Itainium and Crusoe have proven, a radically better but radically different architecture doesn't mean it'll be the mainstream, especially when it means the rest of the computer industry would have to roll over to a new path---and by this I include both software and hardware together. Unless we start from ground zero, I honestly don't see the current path deviating from the x86/Windows combination anytime soon. Although Linux design is better, getting the public to jump on en masse is still the trick to pull off. I think I'll probably always run Windows because of how much time I've spent with it...and that's where MS wins. A vast majority of computers run some version of Windows, which is what most people know. While KDE makes Linux more like Windows in the graphical sense, it's different enough that people ingrained in Windows really have a hard time jumping on the bandwagon...especially if they don't really dislike Windows enough to jump ship.
Even so, I can see an easier time with Linux challenging Windows for supremecy. If that were to happen, it could pave the way for a non-x86 architecture to take place, as the modular design of the *nixes/*BSD platforms seems to lean in an easier move in that direction...but I could be totally wrong.

__________________
Hardware Forums|HWF Rules|My DVD's|PSU FAQ|HWF Folding Team|2CPU

Anti-Trend

I for one don't care whether or not Linux becomes the dominant platform on the desktop, though I do feel it should hold a much greater share than it does for all of its merits. On the server however, it's really hard to justify Windows' existence. Linux (or any UNIX) is so much better suited for the role as to make the whole situation ridiculous.

__________________
See My Desktop | Try Linux | Install Linux | Visit My Server | Support Hardware Forums | Easily rip DVDs in Linux | Remember Everything

Big B

As a server OS, yes, the *nixes are better because of the design. Windows would need to be completely re-written from scratch with security in mind...which would probably mean that Windows release probably would not have an upgrade option from the previous version...at least I hope not seeing as how well upgrading straight from a 9x install to a 2k install worked (as in no reformat).

__________________
Hardware Forums|HWF Rules|My DVD's|PSU FAQ|HWF Folding Team|2CPU

Anti-Trend

Well, that's what inspired this thread - the stupid Windows server rebooting and interrupting a 2-hour ghost process midway through. On that note, I'm gonna build a few Linux servers when I go in on Monday, and they've got me building a Linux DVR for security as well. Pretty involved for my second day with them (started Friday) but this stuff needs to happen. I suppose they could continue using Windows 2003 Server, but it irritates me to no end, sucks to manage, and is just as vulnerable to virii as any other version of Windows. It's not good to have a Windows server on the same network with client's PCs we're working on, as virii and worms could propogate to the server itself. Hell, that server may be totally 0wn3d already for all I know.

__________________
See My Desktop | Try Linux | Install Linux | Visit My Server | Support Hardware Forums | Easily rip DVDs in Linux | Remember Everything

Impotence

Thats a very good point, when i work with friends laptops etc i dont connect them into my network, untill im sure that theres nothing up with them. This has REALLY saved me alot of work, as one laptop that i had was full of nasty (incl sasser).

so, my advice is if your sorting someones computer for them... dont network them untill your SURE its safe (or YOUR computer & YOUR bandwidth will eventually be spreading worms around).

__________________