Linux for datacenter & large secure data facilities. I wouldn't trust a Windows machine as a mission-critical internet server, simply because of the security issues with IIS.
However, as a Domain, Workgroup, DNS, E-Mail/Groupware, File/Print or Application Server, I'll choose Windows 2000 Server. I have only had a few hours to utilize Win2K3, so I really can't comment on it, but I like the stability, scalability, monitorability, reliability, efficiency and operability of Windows 2000 for those aforementioned roles.
Perhaps once I get a little more practice with Unix/Linux, I'll change my mind on that, but for someone who's starting out and catering to small-business, Windows 2000 does the trick reliably and at a price-point that's competitive.
DNS is retardedly simple to do in linux, and running multiple slaves is easy aswell. I currently list 6 DNS servers for my main site, and they are all bind powered.
One exception I should point out aswell is large game server companys. A few of my larger game server clients (1/4 rack and up) are windows only. They have a couple nix servers BUT they need the latest games to run their best, and linux you only get a few games and usually not the first release.
I charge $75-$100/hr depending on the situation, I can put aside my personal feeling for them when I repair their machines
but the maintenence is higher.
also, you can set it and forget it. Updates are easy to automate, so all you have to do is edit your records and reload your service.
]$ uptime
12:57am up 340 days, 12:48, 1 user, load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00
thats a common occurance, where running a DNS server on windows will require alot of patching, reboots, and administration time.
I've ran both for companys. DNS is easy to do on windows, but administration costs are higher over time.
Desktop = Windows 2000/XP
Small server (file domain print) = windows
Everything else = Unix
linux... when you need tech support... who do you call?? I mean im sure you dont get corp level tech support for a OS you downloaded for free... You also dont "tinker" with a production level server. Sorry you just dont trust your multi million dollar a year business data base that holds all your sales and inventory databases to an OS that you downloaded for free. We pay on average 40K a year per Kbox for HP support for our HPUX k260's running progress database. That covers hardware and software support.
Linux just dont have it...
As for windows.. Your comparing xp and 2000 desktop experiences to Datacenter OS which is different. Windows Datacenter version of the OS is far different then xp pro...
I ran windows 2k server serving all our users intranet and we had a test environment on it for us IT people to test intraweb crap, rebooted only 2x a year for software upgrades...
pretty damn reliable if you build the box to HCL specs...
I think that Linux is a more rewarding kernel. Granted, the learning curve is a hell of a lot steeper than Windows 3.11 for workgroups, but you get to understand how your system actually works.
As for preference, it really depends on what your computing needs are. If you're just a casual emailer, then any windows suite will work well for you. If you're into development, it's hard to beat linux' open source support. If you're into security, you may want to try BSD's tried and true methods.
Like I said, it's all a matter of preference. On that note, heres my brother's setup:
Webserver/Smtp : OpenBSD
Mysql Database : Slackware Linux
Dedicated NFS/FTP Mounts: Freebsd
Primary DNS Server : OpenBSD
Firewall/Nat : OpenBSD
Test-setup: NetBSD on Dreamcast (Nearing Completion)
Comments
However, as a Domain, Workgroup, DNS, E-Mail/Groupware, File/Print or Application Server, I'll choose Windows 2000 Server. I have only had a few hours to utilize Win2K3, so I really can't comment on it, but I like the stability, scalability, monitorability, reliability, efficiency and operability of Windows 2000 for those aforementioned roles.
Perhaps once I get a little more practice with Unix/Linux, I'll change my mind on that, but for someone who's starting out and catering to small-business, Windows 2000 does the trick reliably and at a price-point that's competitive.
One exception I should point out aswell is large game server companys. A few of my larger game server clients (1/4 rack and up) are windows only. They have a couple nix servers BUT they need the latest games to run their best, and linux you only get a few games and usually not the first release.
I charge $75-$100/hr depending on the situation, I can put aside my personal feeling for them when I repair their machines
but the maintenence is higher.
also, you can set it and forget it. Updates are easy to automate, so all you have to do is edit your records and reload your service.
]$ uptime
12:57am up 340 days, 12:48, 1 user, load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00
thats a common occurance, where running a DNS server on windows will require alot of patching, reboots, and administration time.
I've ran both for companys. DNS is easy to do on windows, but administration costs are higher over time.
Small server (file domain print) = windows
Everything else = Unix
linux... when you need tech support... who do you call?? I mean im sure you dont get corp level tech support for a OS you downloaded for free... You also dont "tinker" with a production level server. Sorry you just dont trust your multi million dollar a year business data base that holds all your sales and inventory databases to an OS that you downloaded for free. We pay on average 40K a year per Kbox for HP support for our HPUX k260's running progress database. That covers hardware and software support.
Linux just dont have it...
As for windows.. Your comparing xp and 2000 desktop experiences to Datacenter OS which is different. Windows Datacenter version of the OS is far different then xp pro...
Gobbles
pretty damn reliable if you build the box to HCL specs...
Gobbles
As for preference, it really depends on what your computing needs are. If you're just a casual emailer, then any windows suite will work well for you. If you're into development, it's hard to beat linux' open source support. If you're into security, you may want to try BSD's tried and true methods.
Like I said, it's all a matter of preference. On that note, heres my brother's setup:
Webserver/Smtp : OpenBSD
Mysql Database : Slackware Linux
Dedicated NFS/FTP Mounts: Freebsd
Primary DNS Server : OpenBSD
Firewall/Nat : OpenBSD
Test-setup: NetBSD on Dreamcast (Nearing Completion)
Day to day usage: Windoze XP Pro