UBUNTU 7.04, WINDOWS OS(2000,xp,vista) OR MAC OS?

[1991 318is]

High end software is still a big step away. The future for Linux is tied to it's availabiilty as an OEM OS from the major manufacturers with platform specific industry standard software apps. That requires the investment of big bucks up front for the creation and marketing of such systems and apps. In a word, it has to become a corporate phenomenon. It's ironic that a lot of Linux's most ardent supporters are opposed to the very thing it needs to be a serious alternative in the consumer and business markets. It is still somewhat of a romantic underdog. The little guy thumbing his nose at corporate America (see penguin with flyswatter above). Will you still love it when it has 40% of the market, costs $, and there are viruses around every corner or will it have "sold out?"

[scabzzzz]

http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9070119&pageNumber=2

I've spent more time trying to get Linux to do shit that Windows does automatically. After spending all day dealing with server and user bullshit, the last thing I wanna do is go home and jack with my laptop to get audio or my wireless card to work. I am working on my Comptia Linux cert though. Its quite annoying.

[James Crivellone]

so r3vlimited.com is hosted on your servers, Optic Fusion, or GoDaddy's MS II's? also, what are you running on your server 2008? is it just for an exchange server or do you also host sites on it? i haven't attempted to look into server 2008 'cuz i already run CentOS 4.5 or Debian as the main OS and Apache for the web server, Exim for the email server, etc.. and so I'd like to learn more about it, so i'm gonna do a little bit more research here and there, but from your experience or to the best of your knowledge, how is server 2008 compared to centos from what you know, sir? willl it be too memory intensive to serve sites in server 2008?

Hyper-v? that sounds like Virtuozzo in Linux, nah? interesting...

Comparing Linux to Windows is very Apples/Oranges, and they both have Pro's and Con's. I have always been a firm beilever that a smart windows admin can secure and optimize a windows server to the point where it easily competes with Linux, and have built my career around that statement.

CentOS can run on a Toaster, Server 2008 will require a decent server grade machine, but in the end the hardware is not worth discussing as nobody should have a crappy old computer running server level applications in a production level environment.

R3V is running on Server 2003/IIS6 at the moment, may upgrade to Server 2008 Web at some point, but currently do not have the need (other than more Ram which I need to get done at some point)

Currently R3V runs on a Pentium 4 3.0C, Dual 80GB Seagate SATA's in Raid 1, and 1GB of Ram. Its very simple, gets the job done, and has ran nonstop since it was installed in 2005.

Hyper-V is Microsoft's new Virtualization Engine built into Server 2008.

[Jeremiel5]

Coming from a Mail/Server/Network Admin, trying to install the Exchange Server 2003 tools on Vista x64 pretty much killed it for me.

Ubuntu 7.10, VMWare Workstation with an XP VM does me just fine.

I did just buy VMWare Infrastructure for the company, we'll see how many VM's I can load up on ESX.... 8-)

Tom

have you looked into http://zimbra.com or http://scalix.com ...? these are open source applications that are MS exchange-like alternatives to a Linux platform... check it out!

[NC325iC]

http://virtualbox.org ; try that one instead of vmware. when you installed ubuntu, did you completely uninstall your windows os in both master and slave(s) drive(s)..?

i installed ubuntu without uninstalling windows cause i didnt want to have to lose my files, but when i uninstalled ubuntu i wiped my computer clean anyway so it was all for nought, i may try it again, mint looks nice i think i might try that one out, but i dont know if i want to use xfce or gnome, at school we use gnome on some computer (redhat is on our 2nd campus) so im somewhat familiar with gnome

[Jeremiel5]

High end software is still a big step away. The future for Linux is tied to it's availabiilty as an OEM OS from the major manufacturers with platform specific industry standard software apps. That requires the investment of big bucks up front for the creation and marketing of such systems and apps. In a word, it has to become a corporate phenomenon. It's ironic that a lot of Linux's most ardent supporters are opposed to the very thing it needs to be a serious alternative in the consumer and business markets. It is still somewhat of a romantic underdog. The little guy thumbing his nose at corporate America (see penguin with flyswatter above). Will you still love it when it has 40% of the market, costs $, and there are viruses around every corner or will it have "sold out?"

google is making bank from running Linux servers; most web hosting industries are running Linux servers or is moving to Linux and one of the main reason is because there are not so many scripts or viruses written in Linux to put such Linux platform down as fast as a windows OS. Just like what James Crivellone said, and I agree with him to the fullest extent, "I have always been a firm beilever that a smart windows admin can secure and optimize a windows server to the point where it easily competes with Linux, and have built my career around that statement.", so unless you know of a system admin that knows exactly which functions and features to enable and disable in a windows server, then it wouldn't technically run like a Linux from the get go.

R3V is running on Server 2003/IIS6 at the moment, may upgrade to Server 2008 Web at some point, but currently do not have the need (other than more Ram which I need to get done at some point)

Currently R3V runs on a Pentium 4 3.0C, Dual 80GB Seagate SATA's in Raid 1, and 1GB of Ram. Its very simple, gets the job done, and has ran nonstop since it was installed in 2005.

I agree with you on the system administrator's knowledge in Window servers... I wish I did that, but I took the other route, lol...

I didn't know you can run PHP on MS server 2003/IIs6 server coupled with MySQL database; it is running MySQL, right? or MS SQL?

so R3V is on a dedi. server on its own without sharing the resources throughout neighbouring sites or web applications...? that is soo tight if it is! props to you, sir, for making it run for 3 years nonstop minus bandwidth providers failing or what not, hehe... so all you really need is more RAM to server the multiple concurrent connections...?

[James Crivellone]

google is making bank from running Linux servers; most web hosting industries are running Linux servers or is moving to Linux and one of the main reason is because there are not so many scripts or viruses written in Linux to put such Linux platform down as fast as a windows OS. Just like what James Crivellone said, and I agree with him to the fullest extent, "I have always been a firm beilever that a smart windows admin can secure and optimize a windows server to the point where it easily competes with Linux, and have built my career around that statement.", so unless you know of a system admin that knows exactly which functions and features to enable and disable in a windows server, then it wouldn't technically run like a Linux from the get go.




I agree with you on the system administrator's knowledge in Window servers... I wish I did that, but I took the other route, lol...

I didn't know you can run PHP on MS server 2003/IIs6 server coupled with MySQL database; it is running MySQL, right? or MS SQL?

so R3V is on a dedi. server on its own without sharing the resources throughout neighbouring sites or web applications...? that is soo tight if it is! props to you, sir, for making it run for 3 years nonstop minus bandwidth providers failing or what not, hehe... so all you really need is more RAM to server the multiple concurrent connections...?

Yup, PHP has been ran on Windows Servers for quite awhile.

[Jeremiel5]

i installed ubuntu without uninstalling windows cause i didnt want to have to lose my files, but when i uninstalled ubuntu i wiped my computer clean anyway so it was all for nought, i may try it again, mint looks nice i think i might try that one out, but i dont know if i want to use xfce or gnome, at school we use gnome on some computer (redhat is on our 2nd campus) so im somewhat familiar with gnome

gnome is cool; looks just like windows...

as for other Linux OS:

if you decide to install Linux OS in the near future whether it be Ubuntu, RedHat, Debian, FREEBSD, etc... make sure that the current OS on the master drive has been un-installed... or if you want to keep your window OS current, then turn that master drive into a slave by jumping the drive to a slave drive and jump the other slave drive that has no OS at all into a master drive, then make sure that the previous slave drive is a master drive recognized on your bios, then make sure that the previous master drive has been jumped as a slave and is disconnected from the cable linking it to the motherboard, and then install the new OS (ubuntu, debian, etc...)... by doing so, you will not lose anything...

[NC325iC]

only one hard drive, its a laptop, i just partitioned it

[Jeremiel5]

only one hard drive, its a laptop, i just partitioned it

ah, okay, gotcha... yeah, then you will need an external drive to back up the laptop hard drive info, uninstall the OS on the lap top and re-install linux... you know what's up

[Larry e30]

I used Windows my whole life until recently. I have a MacBook and I love it. Once you know the little tricks with Macs its really fu. I've had it for almost a year now and it still hasnt crashed. My best advice would be get a MacBook, get Bootcamp with Windows XP, pretty much best of both worlds. Dont get Vista, that shit sucks

[1991 318is]

There's news for Linux:
http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/36706/140/
Apple has joined the Linux Foundation. Right now it's just Flash on the web. A full featured Linux version of CS3 would be truly ground breaking and remove the last big barrier to Linux becoming a player.
Of course Microsoft is in the game also:
http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/36709/118/

[Jeremiel5]

There's news for Linux:

http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/36706/140/

Apple has joined the Linux Foundation. Right now it's just Flash on the web. A full featured Linux version of CS3 would be truly ground breaking and remove the last big barrier to Linux becoming a player.
Of course Microsoft is in the game also:
http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/36709/118/

WOW! VERY NICE!

[1991 318is]

Adobe's has just announced that the 64 bit version of Photoshop will be Vista only!
http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/36775/140/
The development cost of an Adobe Suite is undoubtedly high. Maybe they're just going where the money is. After all, Apple and Mac aren't married to each other. You only have to look at Premiere to see that the Windows version is better. In the past Photoshop was way ahead of other image editors. Now one could very well argue that for most people there are many alternatives available as the average consumer comes nowhere near utilizing all of the features of even CS2 or 3 versions. Still, for the anyone who needs it, Photoshop is the deal. Partly because it is and partly because it has an existing user base and the support of countless plug-in developers. Linux will continue to grow because it's already ahead of what most home/student users need in computing power and applications. What's it take for email, youtube, instant messenger, itunes, and an occasional research paper. I spend most of my time on the computer with the internet connection unplugged.