Research Project: Linux Hosting vs NT

[letsgetsilly]

Hello everyone,

*EDIT-- More information added below

I am student majoring in MIS and Financing, and I have been assigned a research project in which I place myself in the shoes of a supervisor at an IT company (hypothetical). This project constitutes 25% of my final grade.

I need to deterimine the compatibility issues, long-term trends, training provided, and usability of each operating system, and determine which would be best for this hypothetical company.

Ideas on how to obtain the best information for this topic would be appreciated. I need to interview real people in the IT market faced with these same problems, but I do not know where to find them. Suggestions on any books, websites, or other sources would be helpful as well.

So, NT or Linux, which should it be? Please, drop me your thoughts via email or post any suggestions here.

Thanks!
-Adam

 

[FoBoT]

first, you need to tell us what you are going to do with the box, "hosting" is a bit vague

what are the requirements? what applications? who are the users/developers? what is the business?

more info please

 

[RossMAN]

*Nix > NT hosting

If you're referring to webhosting I think you'll get more responses on WHT or HostHideout.com

 

[letsgetsilly]

Here is my assignment, verbatim:

"As the supervisor of IT development in your company (your choice), you have been asked to write a report that assesses the pros and cons of a Linux/Unix-based versus an NT networking system. Your boss has been intrigued by published accounts describing businesses that have converted to Linux/Unix systems because of their price and reliability. Besides the costs involved, your boss wants you to look at compatibility issues, long-term trends, training provided, and usability. Recommend the best system for the company?s needs. "

A more apropriate word than 'hosting' would be 'networking'. This assignment is very vague on the exact uses of this 'networking system' for this hypothetical business, but I am able to take any angle that I want.

I will focus on internal networking within the business.

RossMAN--Thank you for the links, I will check them out immediately.

I hope this information is more helpful.

Thanks!
-Adam

 

[mjquilly]

If you are to reccomend the best system for "the company's needs", wouldn't it be nice to know ANYTHING about the company?

 

[yoda291]

This is really a problem of adapting to the resources you have. An NOS is dependent on the staff that runs it, the competency of said staff, the amount of research that goes into hardware purchases, budgeting. You also have to make leeway for market changes. It won't do you any good if, 5 years from now, your senior admin is tempted away with job offers tripling what you're giving him. Also, the technicals are very very dependent upon uses. What is primary purpose of establishing a server-client network. Knee jerk "BSD/LINUX rule, windows SUX" reactions are gonna get you an F. First, outline your needs, then judge each NOS. A network is only as good as the staff that runs it.

 

[letsgetsilly]

Yoda - Thanks for the helpful post. I must admit the first reaction is look for evidence that supports Linux only, but I need to keep an open mind.

Mjquilly- Well if you read my above post, you should see that the assignment is kind of open ended. I could choose a company to hypothetically work for, but I haven't decided if I want to do that yet, or just create a company on my own with its own internal needs.

 

[yoda291]

well, if you need any help, you can pm me. There are lots of people in the networking forum who would be able to help you out as well.

 

[JeffreyLebowski]

OK,
The basic of it is, Linux based maybe cheaper to begin with, but over the long run, you will spend more money training, and paying for omeone to support the *nix system. Anywhere you go(cept for *nix specific pages) the majority of people will know how to use windows. Same goes for the admin people in the real world. More Windows only certified admins out there, mean they are competing in a more saturated market, therefore will demand lower salaries, then persons with *nix knowledge.
Also, if this is a internal network then data migration, and complete setup is easier if using one platform, IE windows, therefor you don't have to train your staff to use win were asa linux based workstation, users will have to be trained.

Then you have hardware compatibility. More hardware is Win cert than *nix cert. so you have a larger choice of equipment, therefor allowing you to purchase equipment at lower prices.

 

[ultimatebob]

Linux hosting is substantially cheaper than NT's. Besides the upfront savings of not having to pay for a server license, you'll also have less downtime and labor costs from security patch installation.

Windows NT also near End Of Life, and will no longer be supported by the end of 2004. I would only recommend using it for boxed "All In One" vendor applications that require a Windows server product, and even then I would try to use Windows 2000 and Apache if at all possible. In it's current state, IIS is a security breach waiting to happen.

 

[yoda291]

Originally posted by: JeffreyLebowski
OK,
The basic of it is, Linux based maybe cheaper to begin with, but over the long run, you will spend more money training, and paying for omeone to support the *nix system. Anywhere you go(cept for *nix specific pages) the majority of people will know how to use windows. Same goes for the admin people in the real world. More Windows only certified admins out there, mean they are competing in a more saturated market, therefore will demand lower salaries, then persons with *nix knowledge.
Also, if this is a internal network then data migration, and complete setup is easier if using one platform, IE windows, therefor you don't have to train your staff to use win were asa linux based workstation, users will have to be trained.

Then you have hardware compatibility. More hardware is Win cert than *nix cert. so you have a larger choice of equipment, therefor allowing you to purchase equipment at lower prices.

This is as good a summary as you'll prolly get for Microsoft's TCO argument, which I personally always take with a grain of salt.

In terms of the technicals, MS's only real advantage, and even I will give it to them, is corporate liability. This is a very very big deal. They have HUGE support costs and resources, so if something goes wrong, your business can point a finger at someone. They've also been playing the corporate environment longer than most firms...outdone only by old school bsd style unix and netware. Linux support, if you look around is generally not geared towards a large corporate environment with little to no liability on anything you do.

TCO generally fails a few reasons tho:
The microsoft licensing, support expiration cycle, and upgrade schedules are exceedingly costly.
Generally, hardware investment is much higher
People must still be trained in the use of windows as a Server Operating system.
Staff Costs are generally higher because much of the support and technical work ends up being outsourced.

A GOOD model to start with is a more mature NOS like Netware or a unix variant latched into windows workstations. This changes of course with different network models and different plans. It has a higher initial investment required in terms of acquiring a well versed administrator, setup, and time til you can start production...and is not always balanced out by a lower hardware bottom line and saving on licensing costs.

 

[letsgetsilly]

So even when going the Windows route, you think there will be a substantial ammount of training that needs to be done? How so? how much compared to *nix?

It also seems that NT is much more expensive to maintain, and it would also be unsuppoted in the near future--these are elements that would have a high impact on the costs of a business

I believe i've gone crosseyed

-Adam

 

[FoBoT]

there are simple out of the box *nix solutions that are just as easy to use as windows, so take that MS TCO crap and throw it into the dumper

if you hire good IT people, they will "use the right tool for the right job" , if you hire MS MCSE puppy mill graduates, you will get what you overpay for

 

[letsgetsilly]

Does anyone have any additional websites or research that support any of these views? So far i hear a lot of different opinions, but nothing is supported.