Nice post rysiekmus.....

Ditto. Great stuff Ryszard.

We have Windows and Unix where I work too.
The ratio for Windows is 53 to 1 servers to admins, Unix is 75 to 1 and they have to know Solaris HP-UX and AIX. Sun, HP and IBM all release quarterly patch bundles, Windows we get Monthly patches from MS and get drivers from HP/Compaq on no set schedule. Windows we have several different tools to help with the patch installation, unix side just uses the script built into the patch bundle.
Those "studies" that show how much more is costs to admin Linux boxen are all fixed from the start. They add in the cost of a Linux certification and assume that the admin already has an MCSE, so the cost of the class/certification gets added to the salary of the admin so that throws a big difference from the start.
We still have issues with windows, there was the SAN problem where the san connections would drop during heavy disk utilization, we had to roll out a hotfix for that. There are several cluster patches, some included in SP1, some not. There was the mess with MS05-018 and all the windows 2000 servers bugchecking at random, MS released a fix but didn't re-release the patch and would not certify the patch to be installed prior to the bugcheck. So for that one moonth period all of our 2000 servers were rebooting at random, we finally just started installing the 18 fix ahead of time figuring it couldn't makes things any worse.

hi
here we are back again,

to build something, working needs some brain.
for small business,for my place, its better windows, as my boss return to me "can they run autocad?" when he saw me working with a box turn to linux. I dont have enough brain to support it
autocad gives money, and you pay for it
autocad is stick with windows

money vs time , as nobody in the office is skilled, we can not have linux.
i tried to make a file server, it did not work, not from linux side, 'hardware' , the socket on the wall and the wiring was faulty.

so, if for a job we get 100$ and we pay for software 10 $, we don't talk about linux. but if we don't get the 100$ and get only 12$ then we have to think about an alternative.

linux is not well known.
we haven't got the pressure for update yet.
this pressure comes in the way that windows xp, locks on many hardware on the pc [disk , proccesor...dnt remember]. and sometime the disk will burst, explode, its spirit [disk] will blow away. so, with windows xp, we got a problem maybe.
another pushing to update, comes with MSN messenger. after some time 5.0 could not work, so we had to update to 6, then 6 could not run, so we had to get 6.1 or something and so on


bye

Hi Gkarfield,

I can understand your problem. Of course, I too use a Windows workstation at work just because I need to use professional tools for administration. They are simply not available on Linux. Autocad is a very highly sophisticated tool and it will not be available on Linux until this system becomes widly used. And this will take some time.

I can agree sometimes it takes some skills to intstall Linux and especially to make all the additional administration like upgrades and additional settings. And not many small companies can afford that. So for now, for many people it is not yet the time to make the switch.

Linux is still a better system to install on servers in larger companies. Poeple argue that a Linux workstation will never be as good as a Windows workstation. Maybe this is true. But what will happen if the new Windows Vista comes and the system will demand lots of more memory (even up to 2GB i read) and much more powerfull graphical cards? How many poeple will afford to upgrade their hardware? In all, how many of us really need a system which demands our hardware to be a high tech graphical workstation? I know there are some options being prepared, let's hope Windows Vista remains available for some P III 800 MHZ like yours and mine. Yet I doubt that hardware will be capable of running this kind of system. I still remember trying to migrate from Windows NT on my Pentium II to Windows XP on a Pentium III, which worked, but not with a very large installation.

At home, I don't find any reason not to use Linux. Especially if I have to access my bank accounts and to be able to learn. Linux is still a very good option for people wanting to learn more about systems than using Word and Excel.

There are problems in Linuxes, like on my Mandriva 2006 I cannot write easily files into small CD's with in a drag and drop way. I tried many tools : k3b, Gnomebaker, Nautilus, at last NeroLinux. Only the last one was able to create a multission CD' easily. Still I can only read this disk on Linux, but not on my Windows box. I also read through many posts and found "cdrecord" is the main engine. It is said it does support multisessions, but it is not a graphical tool and not many poeple would be able to use it properly. Yet trying to write a miltisession failed on my workstation with "cdrecord".
I used those hints:
"lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/2005-October/100770.html"

Let's hope this could change someday. I think no one should say Linux is easy. The idea is completely different. When you install a "workstation", you will not have many tools, like network disk sharing or tools like ftp,telnet to be able to access your files remotely. It takes time to configure that. But this is only for safety reasons. In general it is much safer to install a system with a limited set of capabilites. After that you add packages and set up unly the minimal set of functions youreally need. And for this skills are needed.

Windows is different. just the opposite. You get everything working after an installation. Almost all kind of access is available. You can use tools like ftp or share network drives, but those can be easily checked by hackers, passwords are sent over the network without any encryption. So again, the idea is different. Next you have to spend a lot of time adding new programs to block and protect your system. But this easy installation too is changing. When I install Windows Xp now I get a system firewall built in, so it again does not let me use shared drives over my home network and I have to do some managent to get this working.

My collegue at work told me there are very professional tools for Windows where you can use some special templates that allow you to apply security measures easily. He once used this tool, but then everything was blocked. So he worked for many days to find out what to unlock and he could not find a way to unlock some blocks. Finally he gave up and reverted the installation to the point before the template was applied.

In Europe some countries like France and Germany are going to use Linux systems in the government institutions, so this will cause a new sytuation better for us too.

Regards,
Ryszard

Yes rysiekmus,
you are right about a great many things.
Autocad, Inventor and Solid Works are not useable on a linux machine, and that is pity.
It will take surely some time, before all drivers and applications will be availlable for linux.
But the way is getting shorter, and the day will come that one is realy free to choose which OS to use..I am sure about that..

Just a little information for you to put under your belt, in case you come across another Linux vs Window argument in the future:

W2k3 by default blocks every services down, you'll need to go to server management console to turn them on one by one (it also allows you to set permission such as who can access what and who can't).

as for special templates to apply security, just do all that stuff from AD (active directory).

regard,

hey
one thing they say is that learning here, you ll be helped on windows.

I was never interested in the disc function, but i have noticed that it was going faster when it was empty, and by practice i made a partition on my disc, and was run nice.
meaning a-part for the os[windows], b-part for programs and c-part for data.
i have that layout for my disk and now, with XP, and it runs nice.

in BSD handbook it notice that data stored in the outside rings are being accessed faster than the inner ones.

I use Linux because it takes me back to the hay-hay of DOS/Win3.1. When Windows did not automatically startup, dos did, although in the case of Linux, there are no worries about crashes. Also, I find that I am learning far more than I ever did with Windows. I use Linux much more than Windows now, however I can't completely switch over to Linux, due to the fact that my printer does not funtion under Linux (although I can read/write to my compact flash, since it is a multifunction, printer/card reader/scanner), and so my only gripe with Linux, is that I can't print.

I'll never catch up if I try to read the whole thread, so the last couple of pages will have to do!
Mine's pretty simple.
Philosophically, I've been opposed to Microsoft because you have to buy computers to get it, and you have to get it if you buy a computer.
(I make my own, to get around that). I've wanted to learn more about the "underside" of computers for a long time, but I don't have time for classes. So, I bought a book with Fedora in it, and installed it on an old machine. The next day, Windows croaked on my main machine, so in the process of trying to get it back, I figured what the heck? In for a penny, in for a pound, and now it's on my regular machine (dual boot) and I haven't even gotten around to finding MS through the linux yet. I do have other machines available that have MS on them, if I NEED something immediately, but that hasn't happened much.
There's a long learning curve, I think, for Linux, but man, it's so much more fun! (And more frustrating... I haven't cried over a computer in years, til the other night... ), but the challenge is well worth it.
I daresay the vast majority of MS users could have their machines switched for Linux overnight, and they'd never notice...

;p
get a FreeBSD install disc...... and your widows will fly away [if you dont take care]

Hi,

I just bumped into this absolutely fantastic problem!
I bought myself a new Logitech USD keyboard.
So I unplugged the old one - PS/2 port, plugged in the USD keyboard and my Linux new all he needed. No problem with logging in.

Guess what?

I wanted to boot my Widnows partition to check something. So just started.... and I could not log in, because I could not use my new keyboard. So I had to do:
1) Unplug my new keyboard
2) Plug in the old PS/2 one
3) Reboot
4) Login
5) Unplug my old keyboard
6) Plug in my new keyboard so that Windows could recognize the new hardware.

This is really one good reason to ban Windows.

Ryszard

It doesn't lock every servece down, just a few. It also has a worthless security enhancement to IE which is useless because IE shouldn't be installed on a server anyway. they are playing secure but still not serious about it.

Hi,

well this is a good example, when poeple think any default system setup is the best solution. Many people do not have any idea that a one partition C: system installation is the worst configuration you can have. In professional installations this is never practiced.

On the other hand I cannot get some of my friends to unserstand this problem. They just cannot understand, why they should not store their documents in My Documents. I cannot blame them.

As for me, I always install Windows system on C:, create another partition for my documents D: and also I never store my documents in "My Computer\Documents and settings\Ryszard", because this is on the C: drive. What we only need is some spare 6GB to be able to make DVD copies, because many COPY functions first create a DVD disk image before they start to record.

I also modified my registry to change the location for My Documents to store them on d:.

This way the system drive does not get defragmented, which is one the major reasons for a system bottleneck.

Ryszard

I think you mean fragmented here, defragmented is when you fix it
Your system drive can still become plenty fragmented because your documents are not the only thing writing there. /temp /tep, all the IE crap unless you move your whole profile. Many small logfiles and databases under the windows or winnt folder.
Besides befragmenting doesn't make that much differnece anyway. I've tested on windows servers before and can barely measure the difference between a defragmented and fragmented file system there.