Question

Locked

Ubuntu server Vs Windows server 2003

By Goober1988 ·
What are the pros and cons of each NOS? I have to do a project for school for net+ and I have to research these two NOSs, and recommend one. I have looked at blogs and what not and all I get is peoples opinions and not a lot of real true facts.

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

7 total posts (Page 1 of 1)  
| Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Answers

Collapse -

.02 cents

by ---TK--- In reply to Ubuntu server Vs Windows ...

I only know two facts.
1. Ubuntu is free to use.
2. You don't need CALS when using Ubuntu.

The rest is just opinions.

Collapse -

My Opinions

by LarryD4 In reply to Ubuntu server Vs Windows ...

Ubuntu
Pros
1. Free for educational/Public use, business still has to pay.
2. Provide basic server functionality
Print Server, File Server, DHCP, DNS, Internet server, application server.
3. Type of hardware you can run on is more varied as you could run it on older hardware.
4. Reliable server and has a broad ranging, public community, for support.

Cons
1. Ubuntu is the up in coming OS in the Linux world and will probably go by way of Red Hat. Their support is public community based. Meaning support is more of trying what other people have done and see if it works for you. This is a different story, in some respect, if you purchase for a production enviornmnet.
2. Your still relying on independent programmers that come up with device drivers for the OS, with no real monitoring by Ubuntu, though that is slowly changing.

Windows Server 2003

Pros
1. Publicly well known familiar interface and system.
2. Corporate Giant that forces device makers to comply with rules for device driver development.
3. Stable reliable OS with an online Tech knowledge base that is indepth and organized.
4. Provides server functionality Print Server, File Server, DHCP, DNS, Internet server, application server.
5. Almost guaranteed that Microsoft and their products will be around for a long time.
6. Active Directoy works and has been in place for 10 years and is considered a standard to model.

Cons
1. Known security issues and constant updates/Fixes for OS.
2. The "Big Business" model of the company means that sometimes the smaller customers get lost in the cracks.
3. Will not run on older hardware.

Collapse -

Linux is free. Period

by cpubymike In reply to My Opinions

Most Linux is published under GNU/GPL/BSD licenses.

These Licenses are free to use for any for any reason.

Any system based on one of these systems needs to be released under the same License.

But what differentiates commercial Linux is you pay for support and any proprietary software included in the distro such as the package manager, your security updates, proprietary codecs that sort of thing.

You can use Ubuntu in the business world free of charge, you can even use Red Hat or Novel free of charge you just won't get your security updates or other commercial support

Collapse -

Free does not necessarily mean right

by LarryD4 In reply to Linux is free. Period

Just because they are free, doesn't mean they are the best choice.

If I'm deciding what will be the best bet for a company, you have to look at the bigger picture.

If I am asked to install a client/server system. You have to ask many questions that need to be answered before hand.

Such as;
1. Whats your budget?
Which includes project budget and yearly IT Budget.

2. Staffing and staff ability
What is the current staff used to?
Will we have to retrain?
If hiring new staff to support the new system, what are you willing to pay?

3. Usability
is the company Microsoft heavy or Open Source heavy? If the owner wants to be able to reboot and check the servers themselves, will it be easier with a familiar Microsoft product or go Linux?

Collapse -

I think he was refering to...

by ---TK--- In reply to Free does not necessarily ...

your first point...
"1.Free for educational/Public use, business still has to pay" -- business do not have to pay, unless they want support.

Collapse -

I kinda rule out the free part for any OS

by LarryD4 In reply to I think he was refering t ...

When asked to evaluate products for a business, I never look at the "free" product. Free is for small non-profits and personal use in my eyes.
Nine times out of ten nothing is for free and if you plan to use an OS such as a free Linux distro, in the end you will be paying for it.

Whether your paying more money in salary for more experienced techs, more money for consultants when you want stuff done, or your loosing money due to costly down time due to bad application of the product. It all has to be part of the equation.

If you have your Linux Admin God and you know he's not going anywhere, then take the plunge in to free. But I always look at it like this, that person is just a resume away from leaving, if offered the right money.

Back to Networks Forum
7 total posts (Page 1 of 1)  

Related Discussions

Related Forums