On Saturday, June 15, 2002 at 3:48:03 AM, you wrote: > An opinion was requested, and I gave it.
And everyone is entitled to an opinion, but what you gave was the typical "down with windows" response when you clearly have not evidence to back it up. > I will make a few pointed comments and then I will stop wasting my time and > the time of the others on this list. I would also like to apologise to the other subscribers to this list, but I feel that this is an important topic. > 1) If you do not know why Unix and its various derivatives are a better, > meaning more flexible, more secure, faster, and more stable, then you > probably don't know much about Unix. I maintain a mixture of Linux, FreeBSD and Win2k servers. I know a lot about the Unix platform, it's structure and it's pros and cons. However, once again you have made several claims about how it is 'better' than Win2k but without evidence to back them up. Why is Unix more flexible? I can't think of anything I can do on Unix but not on Win2k. Why is it more secure? I have been running several Win2k servers for nearly 2 years and am yet to have a major security problem (I am certain that the reputation IIS has gained in relation to security is due to incompetent admins, not the product - a side effect of making it relatively easy to configure). Why is it more stable? Since Win2k was released I have managed uptimes comparable to the Unix-based machines I maintain. > 2) I don't consider any Windows platform stable for commercial serving > needs. I've had Unix boxes run continuously for over 3 years some as many as > 5 and only one time was the crash caused by the operating system. Want to > tell me how many times you've seen the "blue screen of death" on a Windows > box. How many BSODs have I seen on any Windows box? Loads. How many have I seen on the Win2k servers I maintain? None! > 3) Unix is faster for two main reasons - it has a real file system and it > doesn't have all GUI overhead cluttering up CPU/Disk/Bus resources. While > the GUI if a great feature on development boxes and workstations its a > complete waste of resources on a server. 'It has a real file system'. Meaning? I assume you mean ext2 which is a non-journaling and therefore highly fragile file system. Compare this to NTFS which is a journaling file system. The performance loss by adding the journaling is minor but has major benefits. Hmmm, the GUI. You mean the one that shows the login screen? That tiny stub that takes up virtually no resources while it is waiting for a user to log in? What you have said is like saying "don't install KDE on your server, it will take up valuable resources whether you use it or not". > 4) If all you need to do is design web sites Win 2000 (don't use the FAT32 > file system) / apache ( not 2.x) and PHP / Pearl / cgi is OK. But if you > want to be a successful webmaster and provide your clients / bosses / end > users with the best possible service / speed and uptime - learn and use > Unix. I am a successful sysadmin (at least my customers think so) and I do provide the best 'possible service / speed and uptime' on both Unix and Win2k platforms. Suffice to say that you are yet to convince me. > 5) If you want to learn how to configure the hardware - I'll teach you that > too. Just contact me off list. What gave you the impression that I need help? I butcher and build machines every day, but even if I did need help, I would be reluctant to accept it from someone who can't spell Perl and doesn't even understand the purpose of /tmp on the Unix platform. > Nuff said. Not quite. I would just like to say that I don't preach that either platform is 'better'. It all depends on the job in hand and I will choose a platform based on my requirements. I would certainly not base my decision on the foundation-less spoutings of someone on a mailing list (that includes me, although I am trying to walk the neutral path). My only hope is that people will stop dismissing one of the options because of a bad reputation that was created many moons ago and will therefore take a while to counter. -- Stuart -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
