TCLUG Archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [TCLUG:13660] Tradeoff between Linux vs Solaris (et.al.)



On Wed, 16 Feb 2000, George Swan wrote:

> >Linux is fine as a "cheap" non mission-critical server OS. It is very
> >efficient compared to NT. In business it's a tradeoff between having
> >enough techno-geeks around to ensure they are running or paying for
> >the Solaris (et. al.) OS.
> 
> I don't have the experience to evaluate the last sentence and could easily
> be led to believe it's true.  I'm curious if anyone would disagree with it
> and why?

I do disagree, but not in the way you might think. Yes, if you run Linux,
you need a techno-geek around. However, the same is true if you use
Solaris or NT or whatever else. How well a server performs is closely tied
to how good the admin is. Linux can be made very insecure and unstable, or
moderately secure and quite stable. The same with NT. If any PHB thinks he
can buy Solaris/NT and not have to buy a good admin, well, heh heh. It'll
all be over in a week anyway. :)

Business owners don't generally care about what the hardware and software
costs. Maintenance contracts and admins (i.e., people and service) are the
real costs of a computer system.


--
Christopher Reid Palmer : www.innerfireworks.com