Linux - NewbieThis Linux forum is for members that are new to Linux.
Just starting out and have a question?
If it is not in the man pages or the how-to's this is the place!
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Introduction to Linux - A Hands on Guide
This guide was created as an overview of the Linux Operating System, geared toward new users as an exploration tour and getting started guide, with exercises at the end of each chapter.
For more advanced trainees it can be a desktop reference, and a collection of the base knowledge needed to proceed with system and network administration. This book contains many real life examples derived from the author's experience as a Linux system and network administrator, trainer and consultant. They hope these examples will help you to get a better understanding of the Linux system and that you feel encouraged to try out things on your own.
Click Here to receive this Complete Guide absolutely free.
I have been browsing for days looking for information on linux under the headings:
Load carrying capacity
I am looking for info that is not too technichal but at this stage I will take any thing.
Thanking you in advance
I have tried the LDP,Linuxworld and believe me many linux something sites generated by google. The problem I have is that all these sites are more geared to helping someone establish a linux platform but few if any give a detailed breakdown of the features as I am looking for. I guess its time I visited the library again.
Originally posted by s00017679 I have been browsing for days looking for information on linux under the headings:
Load carrying capacity
I think we need to know the "Compare to X" bit... Linux stability compared to Windows/Solaris/DOS 6.22/?? That same goes for most of the other headings. Things like robustness and load carrying capacity will also be effected by the hardware you're planning to use. Whats the results of your investigations going to be use towards?
Security - The NT file systems (NTFS) has better granularity of control as it supports really nice access control lists, although this is starting to be support by the newer linux Filesystems. Having said this Unix system have managed up until now with only chmod! Linux seems to be far better when it comes to bugs in the operating system and application software. The bugs are still there (albeit in fewer number), and still found (and exploited in some cases!) but the open source community is so much quicker to respond to bugs in its software. Take the recent exploit found in CUPS. I got the cert advisory and on the same day the bug fix was released, I've certainly never seen this on any MS products. Generally I would say that Linux can be far more secure, however you need to know more about a linux system to secure it as there are far fewer pretty boxes with check boxes to change things. This is a double edged sword. On one side it forces people to learn about their systems making them better equiped to deal with any problems and make the system secure. On the other side its easier for people who don't spend the time on their systems to miss things, and the default security might not be too hot (unlike OpenBSD).
Robustness - WinNT has never seemed that robust to me, mainly because you get those anoying magical problems that just start one morning when nothing seems to have changed, and the operating system does such a good job of hiding its workings behind a GUI that you can never work out what's happening. So you reboot it everytime the problem occurs and just hope it gets better! So far I've never experienced a linux error that I couldn't at least explain and nearly always either correct or work around. Generally adding to the robustness of the system.
Portability - Do you mean programs from one version of Linux to another or moving Linux from one hardware platform to another?
Stability - Definately linux, mainly for the reasons stated in the robustness section. I've never had an NT box get any where near my Linux boxes' uptimes.
Load carrying capacity - In my experience definately linux, mainly because under load it seems to gradually get slower and slower and slower, but keeps running. My NT experience has been that it gets a bit slower, then massiverly slower then blue screens! There do seem to be exceptions to the rule but they tend to be when you are comparing larger high level applications like database management systems.
Linux Vs Win2K (compared to NT comments above)
Security - Win2K's security has much improved on NT, partially because the servers will auto update from the Windows Update site which help when you want to keep up to date with bug fixes. Its not so great when everytime you login to the server console you see a damn message telling you that there are new updates to install and you'll need to reboot! It's also a bit worrying as the number of holes that need to be fixed seem endless! So all of the NT Vs Linux comments above still apply, but Win2K improves on things. Win2K also has far better support for secure network coms which is nice. The use of group policys in Win2K via ADS makes managing workstaion security policys really easy, but its a pain in other ways as it always seems a nightmare to debug when it goes wrong. It also seems impossible to tell if a change to group policy has actually gone out to the workstions!
Robustness - Win2K seems to have improved on NT no end. The arguments about NT's graphical management applies even more under Win2K's active directory as there are soooo many options hidden behind the GUI management tools!
Portability - See above
Stability - A big improvement over NT but I've not seen any of my Win2K servers even match the uptimes of the Linux boxes let alone beat them.
Load carrying capacity - Again an improvement over NT, especially on larger servers (lots of CPU etc). Win2K appears to degrade more gracefully the NT does, but still seems to suffer random lockups under load far more than linux.
Generally I've always found Linux boxes far more stable, secure and reliable. Having said that if you don't have the linux expertiese and don't have someone you can afford to pay while they spend a fair while learning about linux the Windows route might make more business sense just due to the lower admin overhead.
I've found that its takes little effort to get 90% of your MS services up and running, and a lot of effort to get the last 10% running correctly. On linux the initial 40% will be pretty easy and the remaining 60% will take damn site more effort. However! 75% of your Windows failures will be solvable becuase there is some weird quirk or you've missed something, 10% will take a bit more investigating but you'll get there in the end. The remaining 25% will be weird random problems that you'll bang your head against a brickwall about and get nowhere which is enough to drive you crazy and can cost your business a lot of money if it affects their day to day operation.
Under linux you'll probably never come accross a problem where you can find no explination for it and get no where with it - just because there is so much documentation out there and so many people who are willing to help you out.
anyway - as stated earlier its all just my experiences, fee free to flame away people!