[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Linux Myths...

Hi folks!

The "fud-counter" is a great thing which appeared at the right time. I
think we immediately should address the "Linux myths" [1] issue.

Have fun,
Thomas.

PS: These are my personal opinions and not necessarily the ones of 
my employer....etc...

======================================================================

Introduction
------------

Very soon after the emerging of "Linux myths" [1] at the MS web site,
the guys at LWN set up an answer [2]. This is a necessary reaction,
but I think it is still just a beginning.

In my opinion, we should extend [2] or even create a new web page and
address the following questions.


(1) Myth: Linux performs better than Windows NT
-----------------------------------------------

(a) File and Print services: There are a lot of measurements around
    which show that under circumstances which are different from those
    given in [1], Linux performs by far better than WinNT. People
    reading [1] will get the impression that NT performs better than
    Linux under all circumstances. We know that this is not true.
    Therefore other measurements should be cited.

(b) The business applications: Recently, NewsALERT published that
    Siemens achieved a record with SAP R/3 on Linux [3]. I know that
    there are measurements for SAP R/3 on NT, but using a platform
    slightly different from that made use of in the Linux measurement.
    These measurement should be made comparable. Is there no other way
    than waiting for the Siemens guys to do so?

(c) The scalability issue: Sure, Linux supports only file sizes of up
    to 2 GB. But the 4 GB stuff works on the ix86 platform. And if
    more scalability is needed, one could switch to the 64bit Alpha
    platform. This is not possible anymore with NT [4], and this fact
    has to be pointed out.

    In [5], I read that "Also, on some systems, Windows NT Server,
    Enterprise Edition, can allow certain applications to have a 3 GB
    address space (as opposed to 2 GB on the other [NT]
    editions)". What is true and what are "certain applications"?

(d) What is asynchronous I/O and what are completion ports? Was that
    pioneered by NT? Does anybody know?

(e) The fine-grained kernel locks for sure have not been pioneered by
    NT. We should count the number of locks in 2.0, 2.2, and the
    upcoming 2.4 to demostrate that Linux is scalable (w.r.t. the
    number of processors). I saw these numbers in some mail, but I
    don't recall where that was. Who recalls?


(2) Myth: Linux is more reliable than Windows NT
------------------------------------------------

(a) Reliability: They cite some of their customers. There are also
    a lot of companies which trust in Linux. These should be listed. A
    lot of critical web servers run Linux/Apache. But to claim this is
    not enough. We need to cite some.

(b) Journaled file systems are underways (XFS, ext3), but they are
    still not a part of the standard kernel. There is also (at least)
    one HA project, but the same as above applies here. The only thing
    to do is to wait...


(3) Myth: Linux is free
-----------------------

(a) TCO: Once again they claim something without proving it. The funny
    thing is the transitivity they use: (A): TCO(WinNT) < TCO(UNIX)
    ["in general"]. (B): TCO(UNIX) = TCO(Linux) ["There is no reason
    to believe the contrary"]. (A) and (B) imply (C): TCO(WinNT) <
    TCO(Linux). GREAT!

(b) Commercial support services: The situation is the same as with
    NT. You can get commercial support but have to pay for. And you
    can get support for free from the internet.

(c) Complexity of managing Linux. We know that Linux is not at all
    more difficult to manage than NT. Do we need to make a survey by
    asking system administrators?

(d) Transition cost: Two paragraphs above, they claim that the
    cost for the OS is by far lower than the TCO. This is true for the
    transition cost as well. Therefore the important issue to discuss
    is the TCO.


(4) Myth: Linux is more secure than Windows NT
----------------------------------------------

(a) There was some note (in LWN if I remember correctly) that the US
    Army does not use (anymore) NT, because its not secure enough.
    Does anybody have a link to this note?

(b) ACLs are developed.


(5) Myth: Linux can replace Windows on the desktop
--------------------------------------------------

(a) They claim that Linux does not support PnP, USB, and APM. I use
    PnP cards with my Linux. USB and APM also work (partly). Correct
    me if I'm wrong. On the other hand, NT 4.0 does not possess full
    PnP support, and APM, IrDA, FAT32 neither. About USB I'm not sure.


Other stuff
-----------

- NT 4.0 does not support VPN's. Linux 2.0.36 does so already
  (FreeS/WAN).
- There are a lot of features that Linux provides and NT does not.
  See, for instance, [6].
- We also should look a bit to the future and already address features
  that are promised for Win2k. See [7-10].
- Why do so many ISP's use Linux as web servers, firewalls, mail
  servers, etc? Because of stability, reliability, and because it's
  cheap.
- PLEASE: extend this list!


References
----------

[1] Linux Myths,
    http://www.microsoft.com/ntserver/nts/news/msnw/LinuxMyths.asp
[2] A look at Microsoft's 'Linux Myths',
    http://lwn.net/1999/features/MSResponse.phtml
[3] Siemens Sets New Record for Number of SD Benchmark Users With SAP
    R/3 on Linux and Intel-Based Four-Processor Systems,
    http://www.newsalert.com/bin/story?StoryId=Cn_GMqbKbyta2mJy
[4] compaq.com - Letter to Customers,
    http://www.compaq.com/corporate/letter19990902.html
[5] Solomon, D. A., "Inside Windows NT, Second Edition", Chap. 2. This
    particular chapter is available for free at
    http://mspress.microsoft.com/prod/books/sampchap/1312.htm
[6] Internet Features Comparison,
    http://www.futuretg.com/Caldera/Technical/comp2.html
[7] What is new in Windows NT 5.0?,
    http://www.ntfaq.com/ntfaq/nt52.html#nt52
[8] Networking features key to Windows 2000 expansion,
    http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1004-202-118821.htm
[9] Introducing the Windows 2000 Server Family,
    http://www.microsoft.com/windows/server/Overview/intro/introduce.asp
[10] Introducing Windows 2000 Advanced Server,
    http://www.microsoft.com/windows/server/Overview/intro/advanced.asp

======================================================================
-
Fud-counter:  Setting straight the facts
Archive:      http://mail.nl.linux.org/lists/