On Fri, Nov 07, 2008 at 06:28:07AM -0500, Michael Powell wrote: > > If you are totally new to Linux/Unix and have zero experience and just want > an easy, out of the box "something other" than XP you might try the latest > incarnation of Kubuntu. I know in a FreeBSD list these comments are > sacrilege, but the broader picture is what your needs truly are.
I'd suggest PC-BSD instead, and not only because it's a FreeBSD spin-off. It also provides PBI for software management, which will surely provide a gentler transition for people used to the Microsoft way of installing software, and doesn't make a lot of the design mistakes I see in Ubuntu and its spin-offs. DesktopBSD is a pretty good choice along those lines, too. Still better than Ubuntu, in my opinion. Furthermore . . . they both use KDE by default, and you don't have to use a red-headed stepchild or second-hand citizen like Kubuntu to get it. > > Now running a real live "Web" presence out of your house is probably not > really a good idea if it has anything to do with business. A personal blog > can go down for indefinite periods and no harm done, but a business site is > a different story. First, the reason for having your servers located in a > data center is they are sitting directly on the "fat pipes" of the > Internet. Second, these data centers are "multi homed" in their peerage to > other backbones. If one connection path develops a problem your site is > still going to be accessible via one of the other paths. You simply will > never have the kind of connectivity found in a real data center at home. Make sure the colocation facility of your choice is multi-homed before simply assuming it is. Some aren't. -- Chad Perrin [ content licensed PDL: http://pdl.apotheon.org ] Quoth Larry Wall: "Just don't create a file called -rf."
Description: PGP signature