[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [ossig] IDC: Windows cheaper than Linux
Agreed. In my previous company, had a few NT boxes
which are supposed to be the centre of all activities
of the company. The thing is every 7 to 14 days, I'll
have to restart it. Compared to a Linux based gateway,
which was turned off and back on only when there was
no electricity ;). There are a few other Linux boxes
for web and mail and they rarely gave me any problem
(hardly any). From my point of view, the maintenance
cost of a Linux box is low (if not very low), provided
that it was properly setup, compared to NT or other
Windows Servers, since it requires some one to always
look after it. Just like a little baby calling its
parent when something is wrong. -- So what is
maturity?
Another 2 cents opinion.
--suhaizal--
--- Seah Hong Yee <hongyee@polyscientific.com.my>
wrote: >
>
>
> Somehow this is just so easy to refute that the
> challenge is probably
> gone. It's like telling someone that Elvis change
> his identity to
> Michael Jackson.
>
> First of all, the original comparison by IDC was
> commission by IDC and
> now IDC is trying hard to preserve their image by
> publishing another
> report? Many has pointed out that the criteria use
> in this comparison
> was based on Windows 2000. It gets more expensive
> when you use the new
> microsoft end user licensing agreement. The report
> apparently doesn't
> factor in the various mandatory upgrade regimented
> by MSFT starting
> form XP
>
> I am not sure exactly who and what sort of criteria
> IDC poll on the
> time spent on system administration issue. However,
> on the surface of
> it. All these seems laughable. I do agree that linux
> typically require
> more time to setup and configure. However, I am not
> sure if all the
> tools provided by MSFT really make things really
> being properly done. I
> have had NT that require some fair amount of
> intervention during the
> course of its two year lifespan. That system have
> since been retired
> due to various problems that developed over the
> years. I still have a
> Mandrake 6.0 system on samba running till this day
> and only rebooted a
> few times mainly due to memory upgrade.
>
> Quite frankly, I believe the time spend on each
> system has a lot to do
> with the general competency of sys admin. I been a
> unix guy ever since
> my first job. I admit that I am not that well verse
> with windows.
> However, I do find myself spending more time on fine
> tuning windows to
> make it work the way I want it to be. With linux or
> BSD, this is
> usually done not more than two working days.
>
> On Tuesday, January 14, 2003, at 06:24 PM, Colin
> Charles wrote:
>
> > A fairly independent study, based on server use:
> >
> >
> http://news.com.com/2100-1001-975938.html?tag=fd_top
> >
> > Something that caught my eye:
> >
> > "We believe these higher costs are...related to
> the relative
> > immaturity of the management tools available today
> for Linux
> > systems," IDC said. Administrators, too, will
> become more adept.
> > "Over time, the gap in support costs between Linux
> and Windows will
> > contract."
>
> As I always tell my co-worker. Easier doesn't always
> means better. My
> first job was as a HP-UX sys admin. At that time I
> find SAM very
> usefull and use it all the time. Over time I
> discover that to edit some
> of the configuration file is actually easier to do
> so and hell a lot
> more flexible. I personally think that if you are a
> sys admin, it is
> probably best to learn everything you can. GUI or
> not. I don't want to
> sound like an old fart but, system admin is more
> than just adding
> additional user on your gui or to export your file
> system by right
> clicking on your mouse.
>
> > Maybe the Linux zealots (well, FreeBSD, and other
> Unixes as well)
> > shouldn't stick with the CLI based
> admin/management tools, and get
> > some really good GUI thing running for the
> Windows-converted admins.
> >
> In some distribution these days like Mandrake, most
> of the basic gui
> tools are there already. Besides, most commercial
> unix tools already
> have quite a comprehensive array of gui based admin
> tools. This is true
> from Solaris to Tru64. Quite frankly life was so
> much easier when you
> are a commerical unix sys admin.
>
> > I've seen Webmin in action, and intend on actively
> playing with it
> > soon. What other GUI admin and management tools do
> you all use out
> > there?
> >
> A lot of them are distribution specific. IMHO,
> mandrake and suse
> has one of the best gui admin tools around. However,
> again, in my
> opinion, nothing beat your vi editor and your perl
> scripts. I don't
> want to sound like I like to do things the hard way.
> As a person, I
> love to do things the best possible way and the
> fastest way to get it
> done. If a particular method involve is faster with
> gui than gui it is.
> If is is faster for me to fire up my vi editor and
> run a few command on
> my bash shell, so be it. Being an all rounder is the
> best bet.
>
>
>
> > --
> > Colin Charles, byte@aeon.com.my
> > http://www.bytebot.net/
> >
> >
> >
>
------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe: send mail to
> ossig-request@mncc.com.my
> > with "unsubscribe ossig" in the body of the
> message
> >
>
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe: send mail to
> ossig-request@mncc.com.my
> with "unsubscribe ossig" in the body of the message
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Everything you'll ever need on one web page
from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts
http://uk.my.yahoo.com
------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe: send mail to ossig-request@mncc.com.my
with "unsubscribe ossig" in the body of the message