[mdlug] OT: Microsoft Monopoly

[David Lane]

________________________________
From: David Lane <dcl400m at yahoo.com>
To: petertheplumber at att.net; MDLUG's Main discussion list <mdlug at mdlug.org>
Sent: Sat, August 21, 2010 9:28:48 AM
Subject: Re: [mdlug] OT: Microsoft Monopoly

Peter,

That is my frustration. They are MAKING a big mistake by chosing the path of 
least resistance. then when the web services bottleneck and those systems are 
brought to their knees and the leadership hold IT responsable for the problems.

David C. Lane 




________________________________
From: Peter Bart <petertheplumber at att.net>
To: MDLUG's Main discussion list <mdlug at mdlug.org>
Sent: Fri, August 20, 2010 4:17:59 AM
Subject: Re: [mdlug] OT: Microsoft Monopoly

On Thu, 2010-08-19 at 10:55 -0400, Robert Adkins II wrote:
> > 
> > --- David Lane wrote:
> > 
> > > Recently I was informed that a Linux server is being replaced by a 
> > > windows 2008 server.  I started to think about “Microsoft Monopoly” 
> > > case. MS must have a very good legal team.
> > 
> > The problem is not the "monopoly", it's the flawed perception 
> > that, somehow, Windows severs are easier/cheaper/better than 
> > *nix servers.
> > The fact is that Internet-facing Windows servers are MUCH 
> > more vulnerable to attack than Linux/BSD/Mac-based servers.  
> > I don't have the exact statistics in front of me, but from 
> > what I have seen, WAMP servers (Windows/Apache/MySQL/PHP) are 
> > more vulnerable than LAMP servers, with the Win/IIS server 
> > stack the most vulnerable of all to attack.  This means that 
> > Windows servers cost users TWICE (or more)--once for the OS, 
> > once for the added security and (to a high
> > probability) even more to clean up the mess after a 
> > successful attack; not to mention the down time needed to 
> > reboot the system(s) after the endless cycle of updates (that 
> > often cause more problems than they solve).
> > 
> > You may find more about this here:
> > <http://uptime.netcraft.com/ex/pass/pass-faq.html>
> > 
> > ~~ Michael Rudas
> >    My home page: http://MRudas.2Ya.com
> >    My software blog: http://FaveSoft.blogspot.com
> >    My Protopage links: http://TinyURL.com/protop
> >    http://www.Facebook.com/ScienceMikey
> 
> 
>  When it is said that it is "easier" to Administer a Windows Server than a
> Linux server, what they really mean is that there are more people out in the
> wilds of the job market that are "knowledgable" about Administrating Windows
> than Linux systems. It has absolutely nothing to do with the actual
> configuration or maintaining of the resulting systems.
> 
>  Modern Linux distros are in many ways as easy or easier to setup and
> configure than comparable duty Windows servers/systems.
> 
>  -Rob

    Easier is almost never better. What Rob says about about Windows vs
*nix people can be said about almost any trade/occupation. For example
handyman vs licensed plumber. I don't get it as much anymore; because I
do mostly commercial/industrial work; but I can still hear "I can get
that at xxxxx for much less". Yes, but can you install and maintain it
correctly for a long and troublefree life? Do you want it to fail at a
critical time? See Murphys Law.
-- 
Best Regards,

Peter The Plumber

_______________________________________________
mdlug mailing list
mdlug at mdlug.org
http://mdlug.org/mailman/listinfo/mdlug


      
_______________________________________________
mdlug mailing list
mdlug at mdlug.org
http://mdlug.org/mailman/listinfo/mdlug