Oh! You want to run something "cool" on Linux that you can't run on Windows?
http://www.cs.unm.edu/~dlchao/flake/doom/ Task Manager? bleh. Doom!!! Take that, nasty zombie process!! John --- Tim Sullivan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ok I think I will put Linux on my extra box. But > this is for my home > network. I was looking for something or a program > that was "cool" to just > say I did it. I have Cox so I cant run a mail server > or use the typical port > 80 for the web. I am running a coyote Linux as my > router and it kick butt > compared to the linksys, d-link or netgear ones. So > which distro of Linux is > best for a server os with a gui interface? I was > thinking of using mandrake > or fedora. > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf > Of John Hebert > Sent: Monday, November 01, 2004 2:05 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [brlug-general] Linux or Windows > > Good question! > > I have a longish answer for you, and please bear > with me while I explain it, > because at first it will seem like I am recommending > Windows instead of > Linux. > > Because most of the software that runs on Linux is > free and open source, you > can find versions of this software already compiled > for Windows. > > For example, the webserver Apache can be downloaded > and installed on > Windows, as well as the relational database server > MySQL, and lots of mail > servers as well, and on and on. For a good, but > incomplete, list of free and > open source software that runs on Windows, see > http://gnuwin.epfl.ch/apps/en/bestlist.html. > > So, if Windows can run most of the same software > that Linux can, why use > Linux at all? > > Well, for programmers and server administrators, it > is not a question of > software capabilities, but a question of openness > and flexibility. In other > words, I can do more with Linux than I can with > Windows. Of course, there is > a learning curve with Linux, but anything worthwhile > takes effort. > > For example, instead of relying on Microsoft's > Internet Firewall included > with WinXP, I can download and install a free > firewall for Linux, and then > learn how to configure it to do a _lot_ more than I > could with Microsoft's > Internet Firewall. > > For example, I could write a rule that says if > somebody is repeatedly trying > to hack into my Linux box, I can block any further > traffic from that IP > address. To do the same on a Microsoft box would > require buying software. > Probably expensive software. > The same goes for mail servers. Trying to block spam > with a Microsoft only > mail server requires $$$. The Linux way is _free_, > not only free as in beer, > but free as in speech as well. This means that I am > free to make my own > solutions and do with them as I please, even to > share it with others. > > Granted, you may not want to take the time to climb > that learning curve, but > the popularity of Linux shows that many do. I > personally like having control > over my computer with the only limitation being my > brain and time in gaining > yet more control and capabilities. > > Think of Linux as being like a really big Erector > set or a huge box of > Legos, and Microsoft Windows as a vending machine > with one of those cranes > in it. > > With Linux, you can build whatever mechanisms and > toys you want and share > what you build with others. And likewise, you can > download and use what > others have built as well, and even modify and > improve what others have > built, and then reshare your improvements. > > With Microsoft Windows, you put your quarters in and > choose from what is > available in the vending machine's bin. Sometimes > the crane doesn't quite > work, requiring more quarters to be spent. And then, > you can't fix the > crane, because the box is welded shut. ;) > > Sure, it saves time to buy the stuff, if what I need > is available, and if it > works. I am not an anti-Microsoft zealot; if it > works and makes sense for > the user/business, then great. BTW, I am a Microsoft > C# programmer where I > work, but don't tell anybody. :) > > But for my personal use, I prefer using tools like > Linux, because I can > learn to build my own tools to solve the problem at > hand, which gives me > back a lot more than just buying a solution > outright. > > Now if only Half Life 2 ran on Linux... > > John > > --- Tim Sullivan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I have this spare computer at the house and I am > looking to put a > > server os on it. I am wanting to put Linux on it. > So my question > > is.... What can Linux do that windows can't? I > know about the security > > Issues, cost issues, and I am not a programmer so > those things are not > > a consideration at all. I am not trying to put > down Linux at all just > > curious to see what the difference is and why > Linux would be the > > better os to use. > > > > > > > > Tim > > > _______________________________________________ > > General mailing list > > [email protected] > > > http://brlug.net/mailman/listinfo/general_brlug.net > > > > > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. > www.yahoo.com > > > > _______________________________________________ > General mailing list > [email protected] > http://brlug.net/mailman/listinfo/general_brlug.net > > > _______________________________________________ > General mailing list > [email protected] > http://brlug.net/mailman/listinfo/general_brlug.net > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com
