Win2k vs. Linux, web server decision.

[WarDemon666]

We're debating over whether we should use Win2k AD/Exchange 2k or Linux running Apache and some sort of email program (I don't know any). What we are asking ourselves is whether or not it's worth the switch and all the learning involved. We are currently setting up a new server. This will be running web hosting and will be using scripts such as PHP, CGI, ASP. We need it to be secure and stable, but we also need remote admin capabilities, such as terminal server.

What are the pro's/con's to using Win2k, and what are the pro's/con's using Linux? Will we have the same sort of ease of use and remote admin capabilities that we currently do using Win2k?

Thanks.

 

[ttn1]

Well both are very good at everything you want to do.

Although IIS has serious security issues. I would worry about that the most.

I have set up a small win2K server at work and I must say that I prefer Linux and Apache.

Once your over the learning curve, the possibilities are endless. There are open source
software packages for almost anything you would want to do.

As far as email, I set up my own email server at home using sendmail. Configuration was a breeze.

I also run a cacheing DNS server at home. For when my ISPs DNS goes down, which has actually happened once.

I agree that because most people are familiar with Windows win2k is very attractive because of the
slightly less steep learning curve, but if you've never run a server before I vote for Linux.

I do all of my remote admin of my linux servers from a shell using Secure Shell (SSH).

 

[Nothinman]

If you don't have time to learn Linux then use Win2K for now, but either way play with Linux and apache and once you get familiar with it make an informed choice. Just don't be fooled that GUI == ease of use, once you figure out some of the Linux CLI stuff it's a lot simpler, faster than TS, easier to script, etc.

IIS is going to be a lot more work to get and keep secure but if you already know how to to do it, learning Linux will be more work.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Putting exchange on the internet will be one of the worst things you could do, especially if it does not have a dedicated machine.

 

[jsbush]

n0cmonkey: Yes, I have looked into that. I think we will try and go the linux route. I am pretty fimilar with Win2k, but wardemon666 knows nothing about win2k or linux, I think it will be fun for both of us to learn linux. Thanks for your concern.

 

[n0cmonkey]

<< n0cmonkey: Yes, I have looked into that. I think we will try and go the linux route. I am pretty fimilar with Win2k, but wardemon666 knows nothing about win2k or linux, I think it will be fun for both of us to learn linux. Thanks for your concern. >>



Take your time, read plenty of stuff, and please ask questions. Securing Linux is by no means easy, and I dont want to see your ip in my firewall logs

 

[jsbush]

What linux distro should I use?

 

[n0cmonkey]

<< What linux distro should I use? >>



I like Slackware and Debian. RedHat and SuSE might be decent choices though.

 

[ktwebb]

Just as an afoot. I have run a Win2k/Exchange 2000, originally a NT4/Exchange 5.5 machine for around 3 years. It also runs IIS5, was IIS4 and hosts our site. Absolutely flawless. I have actually been amazed at just how stable and troublefree its been. I expected trouble but have recieved none. I'm not really taking the defensive here. I would not argue Linux stability or security advantages on the whole, but I can say that my experience has been hands off and very little maintenance/management with the server/email products from Redmond. If your willing to handle the learning curve I would say go Linux as well but opinions vary on if Exchange is "one of the worst things you can do".

Oh, and I like the current Mandrake distribution. 8.1 Least I think its the current distro. Just downloaded it a few weeks ago. Ran Caldera before that.

 

[n0cmonkey]

<< Just as an afoot. I have run a Win2k/Exchange 2000, originally a NT4/Exchange 5.5 machine for around 3 years. It also runs IIS5, was IIS4 and hosts our site. Absolutely flawless. I have actually been amazed at just how stable and troublefree its been. I expected trouble but have recieved none. I'm not really taking the defensive here. I would not argue Linux stability or security advantages on the whole, but I can say that my experience has been hands off and very little maintenance/management with the server/email products from Redmond. If your willing to handle the learning curve I would say go Linux as well but opinions vary on if Exchange is "one of the worst things you can do". >>



I think putting Exchange on the internet is one of the worst things you can do. First, its expensive. If you are just a site on the web chances are you arent using it to its fullest potential. Second is security/stability. Why put it in the realm of hackers? Why not put a basic SMTP server on the net and have that act as a proxy between the Exchange machine and the internet? Makes more sense to me. You get the "benefits" of exchange on the inside where you "need" it, and the benefits of a basic SMTP server on the outside. I dont want to start a debate on this if we can avoid it, but wanted to explain my statement more.



<< Oh, and I like the current Mandrake distribution. 8.1 Least I think its the current distro. Just downloaded it a few weeks ago. Ran Caldera before that. >>



Mandrake isnt the "best" server distro out there. It focuses more on the desktop which is why I did not recommend it.

 

[ktwebb]

Its not a debate. Your entitled to your opinion. Never said Mandrake was the best. Said I liked it. Whatever