Re: Linux Myths...

[Marek Habersack <grendel@vip.net.pl>]

* Patrick Reynolds said:
> > But what's the use of NT's claim that they support 4GB files when the NTFS
> > supports at most 4GB disk partitions?
> 
> ?!  I've never run into the NTFS partition limit, and I've set up
> partitions at least 40 GB on big RAID sets.  _FAT16_ supports 2GB or 4GB
> partitions, but FAT32 and NTFS relax that restriction.
As recent as three weeks ago I was installing an SBS on an 8GB disk. When I
tried to create a 8MB partition using NTFS I learned that "The partition you
are trying to create is too big". Only when I went under 4096KB it allowed
me to create the partitions. What you were using on RAID was probably the
stripes technology which can span several disks.
 
> > > (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.
> > Name Dell, IBM, HP, Corel.
> 
> I don't think any of those run major web servers on Linux.  Dell's web
> server is actually one that MS is very proud to have running IIS.  Dell's
They sell machines preinstalled with Linux and IBM has several web sites on
Linux. Probably Corel as well, I didn't check it.
 
> Major web servers running on Linux are Google, Dejanews, and the British
> royal family.  Among others.
RealNetworks as well and several others (http://www.roxen.com/testimonials/)
- all of them run Linux versions of Roxen and they are BIG.
 
> > The sole fact that Corel ships a Linux distribution says exactly the same.
> 
> This is primarily about which businesses trust Linux for critical
> functions, not which businesses sell Linux.
Hmm... I'd rather put an equal sign between the two issues.
 
> > there are patches for ext2 to add the journalling feature to it? I might be
> 
> Patches don't count.  Real businesses do _not_ install experimental
> patches on their servers.  When ext3 makes it into a stable kernel and
> goes a few months without any bug reports, _then_ you can expect to see
> distributions ship it as the default and enterprises start using it.
Right. I mentioned it just to say the features in question are at the door.
 
> > calling up M$'s tech support is $US 38. Linux support is free.
> 
[snip]
> both OSes.  Linux wins by a nod, if only because its free support is a
> little bit better...
A little bit?
 
> > possibly more. I remember trying to configure DNS on NT - took me three days
> > to figure out where the config files are (and I got the information from a
> > pirate copy of MSDN - shame on me) :)). On Linux it took me 15 minutes!
> 
> That's anecdotal.  It's probably representative of a huge number of
> administrators (but by no means all adminitrators), but anecdotal evidence
> doesn't make great marketing literature.
But it does show how easy it is to access the NT information, doesn't it?

> >   - With a standard Linux distro you get a full set of utilities ranging
> >     from basic net support, through printing, development up to games.
> >   - Linux has much smaller hardware requirements. A functional Linux router
> >     can start off one diskette. Can NT do that?
> 
> All true, and good points.  This, if anything, is where any sort of
> marketing counter-offensive should begin.  Microsoft chose to highlight
> the relatively few things that NT is (arguably) better at: performance on
> large, SMP machines, documented security, etc.  We should answer their
SMP is disputable. The retail versions of NT support up to 2 processors,
right? If you need more, you have to order a special compile of the system,
I don't know for how much, but it's probably really expensive.

> claims but probably concentrate on highlighting the many things where
> Linux is better -- even if those aren't a direct point-for-point response
> to their claims.
But fighting by avoiding to acknowledge our weak points won't lead anywhere.
Being fair is the solution - no matter what they say. Linux isn't an ideal,
so isn't NT - but Linux is light years closer to the ideal than NT. That
should be stressed.

marek

PGP signature