comments on Linux Myths...

[Thomas Pfau <pfau@maherterminals.com>]

Web server performance:

The Mindcraft/PC Week tests evaluated 4-processor systems with 4
ethernet cards.  It seems to me that the only benchmarks yet that have
put NT ahead of linux fit this mold: multiprocessor and multi-ethernet. 
This is hardly a real-world setup.  This might get used on an intranet
but it's too much horsepower for an internet host and if I were going to
spend this kind of cash on a system, I'd get a real machine, not an
Intel based system.  Also, many of the problems found during those tests
have already been fixed.

Scalability:

Get real.  NT can't scale beyond 32 bits and it's now stuck on Intel
chips.  With linux, I can go to another processor architecture if
necessary to get more performance.  If that's still not enough, my
sources will probably compile without major effort on a commercial
unix.  Also, some of the numbers quoted here are for old versions of
linux (I guess this is inevitable; MS can't get a document like this
through it's lawyers fast enough for the information to avoid becoming
obsolete).

SMP promises:

Well, Microsoft has been promising us all these new features in NT (now
W2K) for how long?  And now they're finally threatening to actually ship
a product but it looks like most of these new features will be left
out.  At least linux has been making progress.

Demanding customer environments:

There are web sites that list mission-critical uses of linux in business
situations.  These aren't anecdotes.

Journalling file system:

There are three in the works.  I'm sure some of them can be used now if
you don't mind running a development kernel.  NT doesn't have a true
JFS, either, which would appear to be the implication here.

High availability:

Microsoft's current clustering solution is a joke.  They also mention
D.H. Brown; have they done any reports on NT that we can draw from?

Uptime guarantees:

Linux reliability speaks for itself.  Do you want someone to bail you
out when your system fails or do you just want it to work?  Besides,
99.9% uptime means 10 minutes downtime a week - just enough time for the
scheduled reboot.

Total cost of ownership (TCO):

Microsoft cites a study they made comparing TCO of NT to that of
Solaris.  They then imply that since linux and Solaris are both unix,
the TCO ought to be the same.  In other areas, they correctly state that
linux is unix-*like*.  They can't have it both ways.  If they truly want
to know the TCO of linux, they should commission another study into
calculating it.

Support costs:

They state that support for linux from commercial vendors will follow
the Microsoft support pricing model (although they didn't use those
words) and conclude that this is a negative for linux.  Huh?  They also
conveniently ignore all of the free support options including web sites,
mailing lists, usenet, etc.

Management complexity:

Linux is unix-like and is therefore difficult to configure and manage. 
I don't get the connection.  The layout is quite logical which reduces
the complexity unlike NT which leaves software scattered whereever all
over the drive.  They also state that the retraining for the NT
administrators will add significant costs.  I wonder which costs more:
unix admin training or NT 4.0->W2K transition training.

Certifications:

Just because someone holds a piece of paper that claims they are
certified to do something doesn't mean they are capable of doing it
efficiently.  Unix sysadmins have been working for 30 years without
certifications.  Why suddenly do they need them just because Microsoft
has them?

Access control lists:

Why does an operating system data structure require access control
lists?  Are you implying that unprivileged programs could otherwise gain
access to operating system internals?  You call this secure?

All-or-nothing security:

Everyone has already mentioned the proper use of groups and sudo and
capabilities so I won't go into that here.

C2 security:

Except for NT 3.51 on a particular system model with no network
connection and no floppy drive, Windows NT is not C2 certified and it is
fraudulent for Microsoft to imply that it is.  Again, they bring up
something that NT also lacks and claim it as a negative for linux.

Understanding bugs:

There are security related web sites and mailing lists that will let you
know IMMEDIATELY when a security issue comes up with linux.  Within
hours or days, patches will be available.  If you have a commercial
distribution, the vendor will post updated software almost immediately. 
The vendor probably also has a web page posting security issues for
their distribution.  All updated software is available in one place from
the vendor.  I believe someone is now packaging up the update
directories from the major vendors and making them all available on
CDROM by subscription so you don't even have to be connected to the
internet anymore.  Once downloaded, *all* of the updated software can be
upgraded with a single command: rpm --upgrade *.rpm.  Microsoft OTOH
makes you dig through their web site for the patches that apply to your
system.  These patches become available months after Microsoft
acknowledges the issue which could itself be months after it's initially
reported.

Linux security requires an expert:

If I was so concerned about security, I wouldn't have anyone but an
expert set it up on either NT or linux.  At that, I would trust the
person setting up linux more than the person setting up NT.  Linux
internals are much better documented (you've got the source) than NT
internals and nothing is hidden.

Linux makes no sense at the desktop:

What an objective declaration.

Device support:

Most of what they state about linux is already obsolete.

OS Complexity:

If linux's modular design is so complex, what is NT's spaghetti code? 
Linux is much more consistent than Windows.  Linux's GUI (pick one) can
be made to emulate Windows which drastically reduces retraining efforts.

Range of applications:

See Scientific Applications on Linux (SAL) at
http://SAL.KachinaTech.COM/index.shtml or the Linux Applications and
Utilities page at http://www.xnet.com/~blatura/linapps.shtml or
Freshmeat or....




-- 
Thomas Pfau
pfau@maherterminals.com
aka pfau@eclipse.net
http://www.eclipse.net/~pfau/
-
Fud-counter:  Setting straight the facts
Archive:      http://mail.nl.linux.org/lists/