I agree with one thing.. This is pure flame bait.
If you needed some help getting going you could have asked..
-----Original Message-----
From: b-r-i-a-n - [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Saturday, November 30, 2002 2:30 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: (clug-talk) Not running Linux yet....
I don't think this is flame material at all (of course I'm sure you will get
flames from some people). I think your observations are very important and
interesting.
In the past Linux has been used by hobbyists and system administrators who
have a Unix background mainly. What I see happening today is that Linux is
gaining exposure, and people are starting to give it a try, over and above
those who would have traditionally used it.
Linux is equally as functional as Windows 2000 server, and arguably more so.
Linux can be set up quickly to perform spefic tasks and tends to be much
more stable then Windows once set up.
With this said, I must back track a bit, although Linux can be quickly set
up to perform specifc tasks, this often is dependant on the system
administrators understanding of Linux. If one is looking for a point and
click solution then maybe Linux isn't the answer. I personally would much
rather type in a few simple commands as opposed to having to try to remember
a million different things to point and click on. Non the less, there are
clearly system administrators that prefer this method. For the present I
would say, yes if you need to be able to set things up using point and click
wizards then Windows is probably the answer.
This won't be the case forever though. Most of the newer Linux
distributions (Red Hat 8 point in case) are begining to emulate much of the
Windows look and feel, and are also trying to incorporate alot of simple
point and click wizards. Having set up Apache server from the config file
manually many a time in the past, I must say that I didn't mind giving the
Red Hat 8 wizard a try. I actually did find it quite intuitive. It
reminded me of the MMC snap-in for IIS in Windows. Anyway, the point is, so
called ease of use under Linux is improving by leaps and bounds.
Also, I really look forward to seeing Kroupware released
(http://www.kroupware.org). Kroupware basically sets out to provide a
feature by feature alternative to Microsoft Exchange. I think Kroupware
looks very promising. I predict that once the first stable release of that
is available and in mainstream distributions we will begin to see major
businesses moving to Linux.
Finally, lets not forget about Wine. I'm sure Wine is capable of running
third party Windows based server applications. It is really incredible what
Wine is able to run now a days.
As far as office based software goes, well check out Open Office
(www.openoffice.org). Also, KOffice is getting pretty good too.
It will really be interesting to see over the next few years how Linux
matures.
Anyway, thats my take on it...
Regards,
Brian H.
>From: "Shawn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: (clug-talk) Not running Linux yet....
>Date: Sat, 30 Nov 2002 01:15:47 -0700
>
>Was reading through the thread "Linux Work" and thought the reasons why I
>went with a windows server might be pertinent here...
>
>I needed a web, ftp, and email server, as well as routing/NAT capability.
>I went the Linux path first because it's free, and I like the concept of
>open source and collaboration among developers. However, either I didn't
>have the patience to learn things right, or maybe I'm a little dense (can
>be sometimes), but I could not understand what was involved in getting
>postfix up and running. Postfix on it's own wasn't too much of a hassle,
>but it wasn't enough for me to connect my mail client to and start
>receiving mail. I spent my spare time over a period of two weeks trying to
>figure this out, without much luck. I know that if I had been more
>focused, I would have been successful.
>
>On the other hand, I knew I could install Win2K, IIS, and Exchange in an
>afternoon. I did so and was sucessful. My email server is operational and
>I'm sending/receiving email through it no problem (except of course when I
>turn it off and forget to turn it back on....).
>
>The deciding factor here was partially my own experience with Windows
>servers, and the fact that I only had to install ONE package to get my
>email running. I didn't have to worry about an MTA, then a POP3 or IMAP
>server, then tweak a bunch of configuration files, and THEN try to get my
>mail client talking to the server and hope it was running right. One
>package, and about 5 or 10 minutes of configuring the mail server. That's
>the primary reason I'm on a Windows server right now. When Linux can offer
>a simple install of it's server components, with a GUI interface (or even a
>command line menu system) to configure the components, then I think you'll
>see Linux fly. As it is, the installs are still TOO technical for the
>general public - most users are lost when faced with a command line, and so
>are a large number of techs (mostly the newer/younger crowd I'd imagine -
>less exposure to DOS and such).
>
>I believe in Linux, but don't think it's ready for the desktop yet - the
>applications for it just can't compete at the same level as Windows
>(typical office applications), in terms of ease of use, limited computer
>skill required, and overall user experience. On the server end, I think
>Linux is mostly there - if you have experienced linux professionals on
>hand. If not, the learning curve isn't as steep for Windows servers
>(ignoring the common material such as network theory, routing, etc.)
>
>I expect this is Flame material, but here's the objective thoughts of one
>person straddling the divide between Open source, and Microsoft... Sure,
>I'm expecting people to tell me that there ARE gui interfaces, and that I
>must not know Linux very well, but the choice is easy for me... "What's the
>quickest way for me to get the job done?" For me, it was the windows
>route. Although I'm still going to be working with Linux occasionally, and
>see if I can make it work the way I need.
>
>(btw, the other factor for going with Windows was that I wanted to mess
>around with .NET, and MONO isn't reliable enough or complete enough yet).
>
>My thoughts, not yours....
>
>Shawn
_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
