Very Computer

I currently run linux (slackware) and have been pleased with it over the
last
couple of years.

I am now going to network my linux computer to another computer.

I am considering using NT for the operating system for my other
computer.

Does anyone know of any advantages of using NT vs Linux?
I don't know anything about NT.  Moverover I plan on using that
second maching as a server for the internet.

Any comments will greatly be appreciated.

Chris

Quote:> I am considering using NT for the operating system for my other
> computer.
> Does anyone know of any advantages of using NT vs Linux?
> I don't know anything about NT.  Moverover I plan on using that
> second maching as a server for the internet.

And slowness and bugs are GREAT for servers!

The ever faceitious,
     -Pug

Maybe you should try Red Hat Linux instead - the GUI management tools are
quite nice.

I am seeing people migrate from nt to Linux for internet services, usually
for reasons of cost, but then later they come to appreciate the stability
and performance, not to mention the remote system administration
capabilities which are part of Unix. Anything can be managed remotely via a
terminal connection or an X GUI if available. web based front ends such as
webmin are also handy, and make remote Unix admin a matter of mouse clicks
in an html form.

jjs

--

t>...

Quote:>I currently run linux (slackware) and have been pleased with it over the
>last
>couple of years.

>I am now going to network my linux computer to another computer.

>I am considering using NT for the operating system for my other
>computer.

>Does anyone know of any advantages of using NT vs Linux?
>I don't know anything about NT.  Moverover I plan on using that
>second maching as a server for the internet.

>Any comments will greatly be appreciated.

>Chris

I think, all flames aside, NT is a pretty reliable system with a lot of
corporate customers.  Particularly for the medium scale database
client/server market.  NT SQL Server is inexpensive and performs as well as
Oracle and Sybase on Sun stations for medium ( 50 - 250 seat) applications.
For that reason alone, it's good to get familiar with it if you intend to
make any money in the corporate client server business or want to try to
sell any software that you produce.  Same argument for Win95/98 except that
its use in corporate database applications is less desirable.

If you're only interested in pleasing yourself, particularly with Web
servers, there's a lot of controversy.  To be legal, I think you need NT
Server, and that's pretty expensive.  NT Workstation is relatively cheap,
but I don't think you can use it for a Web server legally.  I may be wrong
on this, but I saw a couple of postings that said so.  Supposedly, Linux
with Apache is cheap and both legal and effective for this purpose.

windows nt? no thanks...

jjs

--

comp.os.linux.advocacy:

Quote:>I currently run linux (slackware) and have been pleased with it over the
>last
>couple of years.

>I am now going to network my linux computer to another computer.

>I am considering using NT for the operating system for my other
>computer.

--
roadkill

"Start every day off with a smile and get it over with."
 -- W.C. Fields

comp.os.linux.advocacy:

In any case, as I wrote to you earlier, all I'm saying is that if you
want to (or have to) use applications like MS Word or FrameMaker or
AutoCAD or MSIE or Forte Agent or Becky! Internet Mail, and want to do
so on a reliable platform, NT is a good choice. I said nothing about
Linux reliability. I thought, in fact, that I praised Linux rather
highly. I wish the Linux projects well, and hope I will be able to spend
more time using Linux in the future. Just don't knock NT, because as a
desktop OS it does fine.

Quote:

>windows nt? no thanks...

"Start every day off with a smile and get it over with."
 -- W.C. Fields

Quote:> In any case, as I wrote to you earlier, all I'm saying is that if you
> want to (or have to) use applications like MS Word or FrameMaker or
> AutoCAD or MSIE or Forte Agent or Becky! Internet Mail, and want to do
> so on a reliable platform, NT is a good choice.

Quote:> I said nothing about Linux reliability. I thought, in fact, that I praised
> Linux rather highly. I wish the Linux projects well, and hope I will be able
> to spend more time using Linux in the future. Just don't knock NT, because
> as a desktop OS it does fine.

Quote:> No one said you have to use it, but don't bash it unfairly. It serves no
> purpose except to make you seem like a bigot.

Well, I don't like it for this reason: Joe and I are not going to
convince each other of anything by email. The point of Usenet is that
it is public, and anyone in the world can follow and/or join in the
discussions. Eventually, I get every Usenet post; so the email is
superfluous.

Quote:

>> In any case, as I wrote to you earlier, all I'm saying is that if you
>> want to (or have to) use applications like MS Word or FrameMaker or
>> AutoCAD or MSIE or Forte Agent or Becky! Internet Mail, and want to do
>> so on a reliable platform, NT is a good choice.

>nt is great for people who like nt, but it is a little silly to recommend it
>on a blanket basis as you did. Most people don't have a need to run a
>specific, narrow list of "nt only" software

Quote:>It sounded like you said "if you want a reliable platform, use windows nt",
>which is a little misleading, you will surely admit!

Quote:

>> No one said you have to use it, but don't bash it unfairly. It serves no
>> purpose except to make you seem like a bigot.

>This is advocacy! Joseph is just countering the overwhelming nt hype!

--
roadkill

"Start off each day with a smile and get it over with."
 -- W.C. Fields

I just bought Applixware 4.3.7, and it looks like it would actually do most
of what I use Office 97 for - although the interface is a bit more primitive.
It was, however, much cheaper - Applixware 4.3.7 (including RedHat 5.0)
was $99 - whereas NTWS 4.0 + Office 97 will easily cost $1000+
on much cheaper hardware.

I would never use NTWS as a web server - the idiotic, unenforcable,
"10 connection limit" for TCP/IP services (someone should enlighten
the folks in redmond about UDP, where "connections" is fairly
meaningless.) HTTP is a stateless protocol, without cookies saying
"connection" with regard to it is fairly meaningless.

NTS is just too expensive, in terms of software, hardware and maintenance
to be used as a web server. And it cannot be easily fully remotely
administered,
without a fair ammount of optional software (telnetd, NTrigue etc.)

Quote:> Even CDE won't eat as much physical RAM as NT.  Linux is better at memory
> Management.

Regards,

Bill
-------------------------------------------------------------------
William Henning                http://half-price.computer-books.com
Web Technologies               http://theROCK.bc.ca
http://webtech.door2net.com    http://antique-gallery.bc.ca
Affordable turn-key web sites! http://barts-life.door2net.com