|
|
|
|
|
| HOME | INFOTECH | DISCUSS | LINUX versus UNIX versus WINDOWS NT | |||
|
HEADLINES
DISCUSS POLICY POLICE JOBS ARCHIVES |
|
|
Pages 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
29. Surendra Kumar 28. Sridhar Tadicherla January 6, 1999 tadiche@uwindsor.ca Unix! Of course!! 27. Arjun Narayan January 6, 1999 arj123@hotmail.com Undoubtedly UNIX 26. Murali Nandula January 6, 1999 nandul1@uwindsor.ca Unix! Of course! 25. Abhinandan Prateek January 6, 1999 aprateek@us.oracle.com I feel Linux is the best solution and it comes free. I had worked on lots of really cool stuff on Linux and once you are into it, you realize it is useless spending your money into either Windows NT or Solaris. On the other hand if you listen to the fighting between the well paid salesmen on the Net you will know, how bad these operating systems are for which you are paying so much. Linux has come a long way and now it is really stable and efficient, with a very friendly installation program. Although not as many devices are supported on it as are supported on Windows NT or Solaris, but why should you care, if your devices are supported. Lot of companies are moving their stuff on Linux, you can have more Linux machines as these costs nothing when compared to a Solaris of or a NT machine. Running an Apache Web server, which is also a free software is one of the things which Linux does well. Although for browsing, I will still prefer a Windows machine. 24. Dionysius Wilson Almeida January 6, 1999 dwilson@technologist.com Linux....Microsoft NT sucks!!! It's a f*** of an operating system. I've used Linux for nearly 4 years now...but recently I had to use an NT workstation.. and it felt like driving a bullock-cart after cruising on a jet. It just sucks. 23. Lakshman. R January 6, 1999 lucki4me@hotmail.com Whilst what Ms. Ganesh points out is true in that many corporations including my own employer uses Windows NT platform for intranet, it is because there was even less choice then than now. It is clear to everyone except those who own lots of MS stocks will realise that MS uses predatory practices and that once an ISP signs up for any MS platform, over time they will find it very difficult to use technologies developed by companies not in the 'MS-Bloc'. For example, MS has made it very clear that they want to do everything to quash Java which as most of us know is a fantastic tool in the information age. Jscript pales in comparison. As more independent information technology developers get brave enough to stand up to the monolith, we will have more creative ideas. So don't choose Windows NT platform and close the "gates" on your future, if you know what I mean. Peace! 22. Dionysius Wilson Almeida January 6, 1999 dwilson@technologist.com Linux 21. Mehul N. Sanghvi January 6, 1999 mehul@kirsun.ne.mediaone.net NT has come a long way from when it first came out as Windows NT 3.0 (there never was a NT 1.0, 2.0, etc). But it has some flaws that don't make it suitable for ISP's to be solely relying on it. One of the major gripes is the fact that you have to reboot the system every time you add some hardware or make some software configuration change. That's not good if you are an ISP and using your NT system as a server. Also NT crashes periodically enough (the famous Blue Screen Of Death aka BSOD) which again is not something you want happening in your server systems if you are an ISP. Also there is the issue of cost. Why should I pay Microsoft all those licensing fees when I can get Linux free from the Net or pay at the most US $100.00 to someone like Red Hat Software and get an Operating System that can handle web/ftp/email and Usenet traffic all out of the box? And it does this without taking much of a performance hit. Of course you would be stupid to actually be running an Usenet news server on a machine along with ftp/web/email traffic. But that's just my opinion. With NT you are restricted to Intel and Alpha architectures, although I am not sure what the status is for the Alpha version of NT currently. Linux on the other hand is available for Intel, Alpha, SPARC, PowerPC, MIPS, Motorola 68K, and HP PA-RISC. Linux doesn't crash. I run a ** Developer Release ** (meaning its a beta version of the OS) of Linux on my PowerPC based Apple Macintosh at home. I have had it up and running without any problems for stretches of 91 days, 133 days, etc. The longest I have had it up and running is 144 days, 9 hours and 32 minutes. I would be happy if the NT Server 4.0 (with SP3) at work didn't crash and have to be rebooted once or twice a month. As for Unix systems like Solaris, HPUX, IBM AIX, etc. Linux has the same features and advantages that the other commercial Unix Operating Systems do. Except for the cost, which is where Linux beats all the commercial Unix systems and NT. My bet would be in favour of Linux/Unix. P.S. What is "machine-critical mission" ??? If I am not mistaken the phrase is "mission-critical machine" 20. Ravikumar Sivaraja January 6, 1999 sivarjr@nationwide.com UNIX is more stable than the rest. 19. Rajesh Jadhav January 6, 1999 rajjad@hotmail.com Linux 18. Venky January 6, 1999 vguturu@yahoo.com Unix 17. Srinivas Abburi January 6, 1999 sabburi@hotmail.com Linux Unix NT in that order respectively. 16. Nadeem January 6, 1999 nadeema@hotmail.com Linux or Solaris. Never Windows NT. (:- 15. Prashant January 6, 1999 venkatesan_p@hotmail.com Linux is my Bet. It is the best for future. 14. Prabhakar Babu January 6, 1999 prabu@hotmail.com I will bet for Linux. It is fact that Linux has eaten away a considerable amount of Windows NT market. It is the best OS you can bet on with RedHat, and other companies backing it. Most of all IT IS ALL FREE!! :) Who will not bet on something of good quality which is free? Post Upload your opinion |
||
|
HOME | NEWS | BUSINESS | SPORTS | MOVIES | CHAT | INFOTECH | TRAVEL SHOPPING HOME | BOOK SHOP | MUSIC SHOP | HOTEL RESERVATIONS PERSONAL HOMEPAGES | FREE EMAIL | FEEDBACK |