Rodney said:
RonL,
Thanks for sharing your experience w. Win2k. I had heard that Advanced
Server
may/may not require a multi-processor box(probably the more the better). Do
you know
any of the specifics of when exactly a multi-processor box is required? Does
any
particular Linux distribution do well on a multi-processor box?
I personally saw a co-worker install it(Win2k AS) on a Dell PentiumII-266 w.
only
64MB of RAM and it kept getting slower and slower.
I thought that if I pit Linux, perhaps TurboLinux since I have the CD-ROMs,
against
Win2k; I should invest some of the "savings" from lower software licensing
fees
toward upgrading the hardware for the Linux install. But you are telling me
that
just to install Win2k AS, I need to upgrade the hardware first(on top of the
higher
SW license fees). My thought was to take the exact hardware configuration
that runs
the various Win2k products and install the Linux counterpart on it. So,
would Linux
outperform Win2k AS on a suitable hardware platform? If such resources were
made
available to me, I'd like to try it.
Rodney
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------
In my humble relatively unbiased oppinion (I am willing to run any OS that
will not
crash on me regularly), Linux of any version and any distribution after 5.0
will
outright Smoke Win2k on any hardware configuration that they both support.
I am not willing to buy Win2k at all, but I have several distributions of
Linux that
I have actually paid for.
I am not sure when Win2k needs multiprocessing, but if I were running it
based on what
I have personally seen, I would run all the hardware horsepower I could
afford and still
think I may wish for more.
Linux, on the other hand, based on what I have personally seen, will
essencially run on a
cardboard box with very limited resources.
Linux seems to really love running on my pII 400 with 256Mb ram and 46Gb
hard drive space.
I never even come close to running out of space with linux and my Win98
installation
comes close too often to count.
Incidently, I have all the Ram and HD space due to Win98 and not Linux.
Also, It takes about 70Mb Ram just for the OS to be active in Win2k if you
have less than
128Mb plan on thrashing the crap out of your hard drive...
Just my unbiased oppinion...
yah right!!!
Ron
