WIN9X vs WINNT vs Linux

WIN9X vs WINNT vs Linux

Post by Kayla Kittleso » Thu, 08 Jul 1999 04:00:00



I work at a university and are regularly upgrading PC's in the departments I
support.  The offices we support the PC's are used by staff and are not
student labs. We currently are running Windows 95 on most PCs, a few with
Windows 98, and fewer with Windows NT.   Most of our users just require the
basics; word processing, spread sheets, web browser, and email.  Since we
use PeopleSoft some of our users need Excel.  We are now trying to decide
what might be the best path for the future.  We had talked about going,
eventually, to Windows 2000, but now are looking at Linux for the basic
users.  If we decide on 2000 should be ordering NT now to make the upgrade
easier or is 98 better?   Is Linux better than either one with maybe the
ones needing Excel staying with Windows?   Any suggestions or insights will
be welcome.
Thank you,
Kayla Kittleson
 
 
 

WIN9X vs WINNT vs Linux

Post by Daron Robert » Thu, 08 Jul 1999 04:00:00


From an administrators point of view and IMHO, NT is so much easier to
maintain. Upgrades are upgrades .. some go good other go terribly wrong! I
was shocked to see how long a windows 98 upgrade took .. I can install 3 NT
workstations in that time.


Quote:> I work at a university and are regularly upgrading PC's in the departments
I
> support.  The offices we support the PC's are used by staff and are not
> student labs. We currently are running Windows 95 on most PCs, a few with
> Windows 98, and fewer with Windows NT.   Most of our users just require
the
> basics; word processing, spread sheets, web browser, and email.  Since we
> use PeopleSoft some of our users need Excel.  We are now trying to decide
> what might be the best path for the future.  We had talked about going,
> eventually, to Windows 2000, but now are looking at Linux for the basic
> users.  If we decide on 2000 should be ordering NT now to make the upgrade
> easier or is 98 better?   Is Linux better than either one with maybe the
> ones needing Excel staying with Windows?   Any suggestions or insights
will
> be welcome.
> Thank you,
> Kayla Kittleson


 
 
 

WIN9X vs WINNT vs Linux

Post by David Manle » Thu, 08 Jul 1999 04:00:00


Kayla,

The apps that you mention are probably easiest supported with Microsoft.
LINUX would be tough to find these apps for, harder still to share the files
you create with others in the rest of the Microsoft dominated world.  LINUX
would be a good solution only if money is a HUGE concern.

If you buy WIndows 98 or NT 4 now, Micro$oft is offering a "Technology
UPgrade Solution", which basically means you will be able to upgrade for
free when Win 2000 comes around.  But I wouldn't worry about trying to
migrate to one platform until Win 2000. If everything is working now, don't
create additional headaches upgrading to NT 4 only to have to upgrade again
in 6 month's time.  Also, from a support standpoint, one OS and Office
application suite would be easiest to maintain.


Quote:> I work at a university and are regularly upgrading PC's in the departments
I
> support.  The offices we support the PC's are used by staff and are not
> student labs. We currently are running Windows 95 on most PCs, a few with
> Windows 98, and fewer with Windows NT.   Most of our users just require
the
> basics; word processing, spread sheets, web browser, and email.  Since we
> use PeopleSoft some of our users need Excel.  We are now trying to decide
> what might be the best path for the future.  We had talked about going,
> eventually, to Windows 2000, but now are looking at Linux for the basic
> users.  If we decide on 2000 should be ordering NT now to make the upgrade
> easier or is 98 better?   Is Linux better than either one with maybe the
> ones needing Excel staying with Windows?   Any suggestions or insights
will
> be welcome.
> Thank you,
> Kayla Kittleson

 
 
 

WIN9X vs WINNT vs Linux

Post by John Hi » Fri, 09 Jul 1999 04:00:00


  There is a windows emulator for LINUX which will allow
you to run EXCEL (and WORD), see http://www.winehq.com/ .
It provides:
Support for loading DOS, Windows 3.x and Win32 binaries
Support for Win16 and Win32 function calls
16 and 32 bit x86 code
Large interrupt library for programs using real-mode INTxx
calls
Advanced thunking capabilities
Optional use of external vendor DLLs



Quote:

>I work at a university and are regularly upgrading PC's in
the departments I
>support.  The offices we support the PC's are used by staff
and are not
>student labs. We currently are running Windows 95 on most
PCs, a few with
>Windows 98, and fewer with Windows NT.   Most of our users
just require the
>basics; word processing, spread sheets, web browser, and
email.  Since we
>use PeopleSoft some of our users need Excel.  We are now
trying to decide
>what might be the best path for the future.  We had talked
about going,
>eventually, to Windows 2000, but now are looking at Linux
for the basic
>users.  If we decide on 2000 should be ordering NT now to
make the upgrade
>easier or is 98 better?   Is Linux better than either one
with maybe the
>ones needing Excel staying with Windows?   Any suggestions
or insights will
>be welcome.
>Thank you,
>Kayla Kittleson

 
 
 

WIN9X vs WINNT vs Linux

Post by John Hi » Fri, 09 Jul 1999 04:00:00


 Actually most of the Microsoft office apps run using
WINE on LINUX. Some LINUX distributions (CALDERA) come
pre-configured with KDE which is a windows 98 like
desktop complete with a file explorer that doubles as
an HTML/FTP client, Star office which is file compatable
with office 97, Netscape Communicator 4.51, and a raft
of other applications (including a 3270 emulator and
a photoshop clone) and servers (web,mail,file/print,..).



Quote:

>Kayla,

>The apps that you mention are probably easiest supported
with Microsoft.
>LINUX would be tough to find these apps for, harder still to
share the files
>you create with others in the rest of the Microsoft

dominated world.  LINUX
Quote:>would be a good solution only if money is a HUGE concern.
>...

 
 
 

WIN9X vs WINNT vs Linux

Post by David Manle » Fri, 09 Jul 1999 04:00:00


Sounds like you can do all that you need on LINUX - looks like your choice,
then, is whether you want to find all of these things to allow Microsoft
software to run on LINUX, or go with Microsoft.


>   There is a windows emulator for LINUX which will allow
> you to run EXCEL (and WORD), see http://www.winehq.com/ .
> It provides:
> Support for loading DOS, Windows 3.x and Win32 binaries
> Support for Win16 and Win32 function calls
> 16 and 32 bit x86 code
> Large interrupt library for programs using real-mode INTxx
> calls
> Advanced thunking capabilities
> Optional use of external vendor DLLs



> >I work at a university and are regularly upgrading PC's in
> the departments I
> >support.  The offices we support the PC's are used by staff
> and are not
> >student labs. We currently are running Windows 95 on most
> PCs, a few with
> >Windows 98, and fewer with Windows NT.   Most of our users
> just require the
> >basics; word processing, spread sheets, web browser, and
> email.  Since we
> >use PeopleSoft some of our users need Excel.  We are now
> trying to decide
> >what might be the best path for the future.  We had talked
> about going,
> >eventually, to Windows 2000, but now are looking at Linux
> for the basic
> >users.  If we decide on 2000 should be ordering NT now to
> make the upgrade
> >easier or is 98 better?   Is Linux better than either one
> with maybe the
> >ones needing Excel staying with Windows?   Any suggestions
> or insights will
> >be welcome.
> >Thank you,
> >Kayla Kittleson

 
 
 

WIN9X vs WINNT vs Linux

Post by Pascal Melanso » Fri, 09 Jul 1999 04:00:00


For those who read french...  check the following article...  and it will
explain why Linux would be a good choice.
http://www.net-mag.net/chro/Xl.htm


"My father thaught me everything I know.  Too bad he couldn't teach me
everything he knows."

 
 
 

WIN9X vs WINNT vs Linux

Post by David Manle » Fri, 09 Jul 1999 04:00:00


If the French think Microsoft is 'dangereux'...one more reason to use it.


> For those who read french...  check the following article...  and it will
> explain why Linux would be a good choice.
> http://www.net-mag.net/chro/Xl.htm


> "My father thaught me everything I know.  Too bad he couldn't teach me
> everything he knows."

 
 
 

WIN9X vs WINNT vs Linux

Post by Pascal Melanso » Fri, 09 Jul 1999 04:00:00


why don't you be more specific on the meaning of that...


> If the French think Microsoft is 'dangereux'...one more reason to use it.



> > For those who read french...  check the following article...  and it
will
> > explain why Linux would be a good choice.
> > http://www.net-mag.net/chro/Xl.htm


> > "My father thaught me everything I know.  Too bad he couldn't teach me
> > everything he knows."

 
 
 

WIN9X vs WINNT vs Linux

Post by ed nga » Sun, 11 Jul 1999 04:00:00



> I work at a university and are regularly upgrading PC's
> in the departments I support.  The offices we support the
> PC's are used by staff and are not student labs.

By now, I think you know that Linux will run on PCs, ie Intel
baesed microprocessors, as well as on others microprocessors
such as Motorola, etc.

Quote:> We currently are running Windows 95 on most PCs, a few with
> Windows 98, and fewer with Windows NT.  

I just love when win95 registry eats itself on occassion,
don't you.  How much does down time cost to you ?

Quote:> Most of our users just require the basics; word processing,
> spread sheets, web browser, and email.  

Wait till some users get the hang of latex.  In fact name
a university that on occassiona has a job opening for a
tech writer that can use tex/latex.

With any Linux distribution you can install Xwindow.
Typically there are 6 CDs.  And there's more software
that you can download from ftp sites all over the world ?
And now a days netscape comes bundled w/ some linux
distributions, ie. infomagic, caldera, redhat, debian, etc.

It you install X window, then you have the capability of
word processing, spread sheet, web browser and email ...
There's always old trusty Mosaic and that's downloadable.

... checking bookshelf ... Linux Journal 1998 Buyer's Guide.
yeah there's alot of business sell utilities for Linux
these days.

Quote:> Since we use PeopleSoft some of our users need Excel.  
> We are now trying to decide what might be the best path
> for the future.  We had talked about going, eventually,
> to Windows 2000, but now are looking at Linux for the
> basic users.  

This would be a good move.  Since at every university in
the US, offers a free Unix account if you attending Univ.

Quote:> If we decide on 2000 should be ordering NT now to make
> the upgrade easier or is 98 better?

Well if you bouhgt NT 4 and upgrade to NT 5, I think you know
about the problems you'll have.

Quote:> Is Linux better than either one with maybe the ones needing
> Excel staying with Windows?   Any suggestions or insights will
> be welcome.
> Thank you,
> Kayla Kittleson

Is Linux better ...?  I feel that it's best to be exposed to as
many operating systems as possible.  You don't know what kind of
job you'll get these days.  There will always be flaws here and
there, and there will always be fixes for those flaws.

Linux is an operating system for programmers, engineering.
But I just threw away a brochure that somoeone was selling an
office suite for Linux, Word processor, spreadsheet, database,
mail/comm/inter-intra-net workability (so why buy Novel ?) and
so I forgot who the company/product was.

So dig around for Linux Journal and get their buys guide ?
There's also a good mag.  SysAdmin.

As for games, I do like Boulderdash.

 
 
 

WIN9X vs WINNT vs Linux

Post by Cameron L. Spitz » Sun, 11 Jul 1999 04:00:00




>> I work at a university and are regularly upgrading PC's
>> in the departments I support.  The offices we support the
>> PC's are used by staff and are not student labs.
>> Since we use PeopleSoft some of our users need Excel.  

I work in an office where the Human Resources department
issues forms (vacation request, phone list, etc) as Excell
spreadsheets.  It's the only way they know to make a table.

My desktop is SuSE 6.0 for a variety of reasons.  It came with
a "personal" Applixware.  I use Applix Spreadsheet to do my
vacation form.  Try it; see if it works with PeopleSoft.
They're the only top-ten (in revenue) software manufacturer that doesn't
support Linux in some way.  They'll get a clue eventually.

Unfortunately, SuSE 6.1 came with the gawd-awful Star Office
instead.

Quote:>> If we decide on 2000 should be ordering NT now to make
>> the upgrade easier or is 98 better?

>Well if you bouhgt NT 4 and upgrade to NT 5, I think you know
>about the problems you'll have.

Leave yourself a way out in case Microsoft collapses 1Jan2000.

Quote:

>Linux is an operating system for programmers, engineering.

Linux is for anybody who doesn't need to be able to launch every
Microsoft app available.  You don't need Microsoft for basic
office work.  If you come up with a standard campus installation
you'll save a lot of money.  The office suites are cheaper and
the system is immune to viruses.

Cameron

 
 
 

1. Short Summary of Linux vs. Win9X vs. Mac vs. ???

I would be interested to see a short, unbiased summary of the major pc
operating systems.  Which ones lead in categories like (1) number of apps,
(2) stability, (3) ease of use, and so on.  I am not interested in seeing
bashing.  I know Win95 will lead in apps... I suppose what I am really
asking is which OS's are better for which tasks?  What major reasons would
a person have for running each?  Assuming I have only 1 computer, that
would probably mean an Intel platform running a partition manager with
several OS's.  And does the BE OS run on the Intel platform?  And if I use
Win95 for most tasks, then what things would I be better off using Linus
for?

Also, can you run a DOS or Windows emulator under Linux?  And:
do all of these pc operating systems run equally well when on a
partitioned hard disk, as opposed to being the only operating system on a
machine?  What about software installs that automatically reboot a
computer - how does that affect you when you are running partition
software?  Are there apps that are hands down better under Linus and if
so, why don't more people use partitioning software?  I know the MAC has a
windows emulator; does the Intel platform have a MAC emulator?  What about
Windows running OS/2 stuff - can you?  

Finally, and please don't laugh - this is a serious question - would it be
reasonably possible to write a new OS that used all the drivers that Win95
uses for sound cards, cdroms, etc - and all the video drivers as well -
but that was all it did, for a single-tasking mission: to run games.  The
idea is that game developers are turning more and more to Win95 because of
the stardards, including the 3D standards; but it used to be DOS, and for
a reason - you had basically the whole machine, and it was easy to write
for.  So I am wondering, could there be a DOS-like new OS that was not
multitasking, that used Win95 drivers, and was just for games.  Could some
subset of Win95 internal functions be identified that could serve the game
community; that set of functions be documented and basically if the gods
at Id used it for Quake III, lets say - then everyone would follow.  I
don't know enough of the behind the scenes constraints of Win95 to know if
this is possible.  I am sure that uncle Bill would probably9 have
purposely made Win9X complicated enough to make this unreasonable to try,
but it never hurts to ask.  If such an OS were reasonably possible, and
was written using the Linux-model somehow - or some kind of shareware -
then it would not be a part of the big M monopoly.

I am asking all this in the Linux group because I am hoping it contains
more people who are generally knowledgeable about a cross-section of
topics.  I think in a Win95 group it would be mostly Win95 people, etc.

Thanks, Kevin

2. Diamond Stealth 64 DRAM

3. Linux vs OS2 vs NT vs Win95 vs Multics vs PDP11 vs BSD geeks

4. copy past don't work with a new mouse

5. Perfomance: tar vs ftp vs rsync vs cp vs ?

6. ide-scsi BUG in 2.5.74

7. Slackware vs SuSE vs Debian vs Redhat vs ....

8. fips for FAT32?

9. Linux Advocacy - Linux vs Windows 2000 vs Be vs OS/2

10. DOS vs. Windows vs. Mac vs. Unix vs. NS

11. KDE vs. Openlook vs. Xfree86 vs. MetroX vs. CDE

12. Redhat vs Debian vs Yggdrasil vs Caldera vs ...

13. Linux vs AMD socket 939 vs SATA vs NVIDIA nForce4 4X chipset