Window or Linux

[Joaquín_2]

hello to all

We are a company that we have approximately 100 users connected to the us net.
We have a controller of domain with Windows 2000 Server. ML 330
We have a server of files and printers with windows 2000 server. HP LH3
We have a firewall linux DL380
We have of mail server linux DL380
Too a server proxy linux DL380
we have a serverwith different services (jabber, dhcp, dns, etc) linux DL380
And a server with windows 2000 server of ms sql ML350

And we want to change the controller of domain and then server of files and printers.
We want to have a rapid, sure and stable system. What is the best Windows or Linux?
Thank's

[Perignon]

Joaquin,

That's a disputable question but the following pieces of information can help make your own policy.

During the past 3 years, many military Staffs/HQs of my contry have been moving from Windows and NT to Linux for the purpose of "securing" their intranet connections (at low cost). It's a positive indicator I believe! Linux system works fine, keeps stable and offers evolving capabilities. However, some users have been complaining that their proper routines have changed and their level of control diminished.

I guess that Administrators are more happy than users because living with Linux would require some more education. BTW, Administrators can tune the system as they like without inteference from common-law users. Passionate, Linux-educated specialists are recommanded for the maintenance team of course!

Alain.

[Hoang Chi Cong_1]

Hi Joaquín
As above idea, I think Linux is my choise...
Why? The first think we thinking is Low cost more security...
But one more thing: because in your current system had some linux system so that is very easy if you configure a Linux system.
I am sure that if we have the same server model and the server that running with Linux is more faster that Windows one (I found that with my own system.)
Anyway, I think Linux is better than windows in you case....
Hope this helps
HoangChiCo

[Rick Garland]

I think you are going to have opinions from UNIX bigots. Add me to the list. Go with Linux.

In addition to military, some of the larger companies are looking to replace WIN desktops with Linux. More stable, more secure, and the big issue is that it is much more user friendly than past releases.

My belief is that you have much more granular control over Linux vs WIN. As a result, the better OS is Linux.

[Ross Minkov]

Joaquín,

For servers Linux is the way to go. And yes on the same hardware Linux will run faster than Win.

> And we want to change the controller of domain and then server of files and printers.

You can use Samba on Linux as domain controller. You can use it to serve files and pronters to Windows desktops too.

Regards,
Ro

[Steven E. Protter]

I would lean toward Linux, though in truth either OS could do the job.

Windows really does have a decent, reliable server OS and I've got some admin time on it under my belt now. Its stable, and making changes is reasonable.

Still, with Linux sysadmin control is not hidden deep withing a pretty GUI. When you need to make a change its more often than not a text configuration file. Easy, straightforward, reliable.

Linux releases seem to come out of the box more stable, and less buggy than Windows.

That being said, both OS's will require considerable work before they can be on the public Internet and be secure.

Windows does have wider and deeper hardware support if thats a factor.

SEP

[Dave Falloon]

Do you run any applications that have requirements that preclude either OS?

ie. You run an ERP app that only runs on windows server?

If you only want to run a domain server for your client workstations and a file server, I would run linux and samba, BUT if I was more comfortable with the windows interface, and I didn't mind paying thousands of dollars in license fees I would go with windows.

Its always a matter of preference, and the cost involved has to be looked at long term. If you are less comfortable on Linux but you install it anyways, you will save money during implementation but you may end up costing the company more money down the road when issues pop up and you don't know the answer. You have linux servers anyways so it doesn't sound like this would be the case.

Like I said its a matter of preference, personally, I hate using the mouse, and paying too much for things, so I recommend Linux.

--Dave

[Anton van Ruitenbeek]

Joaquin,

There are more secure systems (which do cost less in TCO) but if you have the choice out of M$Windows or Linux (which flavor) then Linux wil do the job.
Print and filesharing can be done whit any server. Take for M$Windows clients SAMBA/Advanced Server or other PC/NFS servers.
Domaincontroller still be a staggy thing. This because on youre desktop you keep on using M$Windows and they are changing constantly things in there domain and controlling the domain. If you are changing this to another platform you always leap behind.

AvR

[Florian Heigl (new acc)]

I would not change the domain controller, and think about the file server, either running Windows 2003 or Linux, possible combined with openfiler (www.openfiler.org).
The functionality of 2003 (volume snapshots, DFS, etc.) and linux+openfiler is about the same, the performance would be almost adequate (I hope samba3 closed the performance gap by now). supportability would probably be better on linux, as more people fully use the *features* on linux.

Your print service would very probably gain performance and stability on Linux.

personally I'd chose linux for initial cost and robustness ('hello hotline? what do You mean by 're-install'?). I don't want to see my print and file server die irrecoverably on my after a reboot, because 100+ printers blew the system hive over 10MB...

But I also admit that Windows 2003 gives You a lot of features out of the box, with low setup time. Still, from my point of view they are not mature enough. (i.e. defrag of a non-standard blocksize with snapshots enabled used to destroy the snapshots, see ms.public.windows.storage - that's NOT what I call mature, production-grade stability)

[Peter Quodling]

What is best - what suits your needs. You have said nothing about what your company does, whether there are applications specific to that industry.

You currently have a mix of windows and Linux. Obviously for varying reasons. Stick with what suits. A CHange will involve a change of functionality, security, and expertise. How many IT staff, and how skilled are they?

Of course, if you really want rapid, go itanium, and if you really want stable and sure, go OpenVMS on Itanium, but then I am allowed to show some bias from time to time.

[John E.Ophious]

G'day mate,

If you have the support for it, definitely linux. It seems like your environment needs to be as stable and secure as possible.. which are pretty much the two most desired traits of any business. I'm definitely with everyone else on this one, linux is great.

Your Friend,

John E. Ophious

[Claudio Cilloni]

You can post this question in the Microsoft forum too. Maybe some MS bigots (opposite to Rick Garland... and me!) could give you a good point of view.

ciao
Claudio

[Ivan Ferreira]

If you have money enough, you should stay with a Windows Domain Controller.

Linux Domain Controllers with LDAP, does not provides all functionality, like group policies to control the workstations (without tampering the registry), password complexity, folder redirection, intellimirror, etc. If you don't need this, then you can use Linux as a Domain Controller.

Also OpenLdap is single-master, and you should setup an slave, and Fedora/Red Hat Directory Server, even when they are multi-master, few and poor documentation is available to use it with samba (For PDC). Also, the tools for administering the users in FC DS, still needs work.

But, for file and printing services, be sure to use Linux.

[TwoProc]

Since this is a Linux forum full of Unix people...


I say ...


Linux!

(surprise)

[Hoefnix]

As allot of previous post say, go for Linux. BUT you have to look at your service/support group etc.. It has to fit in your company.

If you want to replace the AD controller. Many people would mention to go for LDAP. This will not give you an AD-like controller, but if you add XAD to it (from PADL) it should do the work. (I did never implement i myself so it should do in theory)

Peter