代码拉取完成，页面将自动刷新
Microsoft Windows NT Server 4.0 versus UNIX.html
160.10 KB
Trent Nelson
提交于
2016-06-02 19:45
.
Checkpoint commit.
123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960616263646566676869707172737475767778798081828384858687888990919293949596979899100101102103104105106107108109110111112113114115116117118119120121122123124125126127128129130131132133134135136137138139140141142143144145146147148149150151152153154155156157158159160161162163164165166167168169170171172173174175176177178179180181182183184185186187188189190191192193194195196197198199200201202203204205206207208209210211212213214215216217218219220221222223224225226227228229230231232233234235236237238239240241242243244245246247248249250251252253254255256257258259260261262263264265266267268269270271272273274275276277278279280281282283284285286287288289290291292293294295296297298299300301302303304305306307308309310311312313314315316317318319320321322323324325326327328329330331332333334335336337338339340341342343344345346347348349350351352353354355356357358359360361362363364365366367368369370371372373374375376377378379380381382383384385386387388389390391392393394395396397398399400401402403404405406407408409410411412413414415416417418419420421422423424425426427428429430431432433434435436437438439440441442443444445446447448449450451452453454455456457458459460461462463464465466467468469470471472473474475476477478479480481482483484485486487488489490491492493494495496497498499500501502503504505506507508509510511512513514515516517518519520521522523524525526527528529530531532533534535536537538539540541542543544545546547548549550551552553554555556557558559560561562563564565566567568569570571572573574575576577578579580581582583584585586587588589590591592593594595596597598599600601602603604605606607608609610611612613614615616617618619620621622623624625626627628629630631632633634635636637638639640641642643644645646647648649650651652653654655656657658659660661662663664665666667668669670671672673674675676677678679680681682683684685686687688689690691692693694695696697698699700701702703704705706707708709710711712713714715716717718719720721722723724725726727728729730731732733734735736737738739740741742743744745746747748749750751752753754755756757758759760761762763764765766767768769770771772773774775776777778779780781782783784785786787788789790791792793794795796797798799800801802803804805806807808809810811812813814815816817818819820821822823824825826827828829830831832833834835836837838839840841842843844845846847848849850851852853854855856857858859860861862863864865866867868869870871872873874875876877878879880881882883884885886887888889890891892893894895896897898899900901902903904905906907908909910911912913914915916917918919920921922923924925926927928929930931932933934935936937938939940941942943944945946947948949950951952953954955956957958959960961962963964965966967968969970971972973974975976977978979980981982983984985986987988989990991992993994995996997998999100010011002100310041005100610071008100910101011101210131014101510161017101810191020102110221023102410251026102710281029103010311032103310341035103610371038103910401041104210431044104510461047104810491050105110521053105410551056105710581059106010611062106310641065106610671068106910701071107210731074107510761077107810791080108110821083108410851086108710881089109010911092109310941095109610971098109911001101110211031104110511061107110811091110111111121113111411151116111711181119112011211122112311241125112611271128112911301131113211331134113511361137113811391140114111421143114411451146114711481149115011511152115311541155115611571158115911601161116211631164116511661167116811691170117111721173117411751176117711781179118011811182118311841185118611871188118911901191119211931194119511961197119811991200120112021203120412051206120712081209121012111212121312141215121612171218121912201221122212231224122512261227122812291230123112321233123412351236123712381239124012411242124312441245124612471248124912501251125212531254125512561257125812591260126112621263126412651266126712681269127012711272127312741275127612771278127912801281128212831284128512861287128812891290129112921293129412951296129712981299130013011302130313041305130613071308130913101311131213131314131513161317131813191320132113221323132413251326132713281329133013311332133313341335133613371338133913401341134213431344134513461347134813491350135113521353135413551356135713581359136013611362136313641365136613671368136913701371137213731374137513761377137813791380138113821383138413851386138713881389139013911392139313941395139613971398139914001401140214031404140514061407140814091410141114121413141414151416141714181419142014211422142314241425142614271428142914301431143214331434143514361437143814391440144114421443144414451446144714481449145014511452145314541455145614571458145914601461146214631464146514661467146814691470147114721473147414751476147714781479148014811482148314841485148614871488148914901491149214931494149514961497149814991500150115021503150415051506150715081509151015111512151315141515151615171518151915201521152215231524152515261527152815291530153115321533153415351536153715381539154015411542154315441545154615471548154915501551155215531554155515561557155815591560156115621563156415651566156715681569157015711572157315741575157615771578157915801581158215831584158515861587158815891590159115921593159415951596159715981599160016011602160316041605160616071608160916101611161216131614161516161617161816191620162116221623162416251626162716281629163016311632163316341635163616371638163916401641164216431644164516461647164816491650165116521653165416551656165716581659166016611662166316641665166616671668166916701671167216731674167516761677167816791680168116821683168416851686168716881689169016911692169316941695169616971698169917001701170217031704170517061707170817091710171117121713171417151716171717181719172017211722172317241725172617271728172917301731173217331734173517361737173817391740174117421743174417451746174717481749175017511752175317541755175617571758175917601761176217631764176517661767176817691770177117721773177417751776177717781779178017811782178317841785178617871788178917901791179217931794179517961797179817991800180118021803180418051806180718081809181018111812181318141815181618171818181918201821182218231824182518261827182818291830183118321833183418351836183718381839184018411842184318441845184618471848184918501851185218531854185518561857185818591860186118621863186418651866186718681869187018711872187318741875187618771878187918801881188218831884188518861887188818891890189118921893189418951896189718981899190019011902190319041905190619071908190919101911191219131914191519161917191819191920192119221923192419251926192719281929193019311932193319341935193619371938193919401941194219431944194519461947194819491950195119521953195419551956195719581959196019611962196319641965196619671968196919701971197219731974197519761977197819791980198119821983198419851986198719881989199019911992199319941995199619971998199920002001200220032004200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016201720182019202020212022202320242025202620272028202920302031203220332034203520362037203820392040204120422043204420452046204720482049205020512052205320542055205620572058205920602061206220632064206520662067206820692070207120722073207420752076207720782079208020812082208320842085208620872088208920902091209220932094209520962097209820992100210121022103210421052106210721082109211021112112211321142115211621172118211921202121212221232124212521262127212821292130213121322133213421352136213721382139214021412142214321442145214621472148214921502151215221532154215521562157215821592160216121622163216421652166216721682169217021712172217321742175217621772178217921802181218221832184218521862187218821892190219121922193219421952196219721982199220022012202220322042205220622072208220922102211221222132214221522162217221822192220222122222223222422252226222722282229223022312232223322342235223622372238223922402241224222432244224522462247224822492250225122522253225422552256225722582259226022612262226322642265226622672268226922702271227222732274227522762277227822792280228122822283228422852286228722882289229022912292229322942295229622972298229923002301230223032304230523062307230823092310231123122313231423152316231723182319232023212322232323242325232623272328232923302331233223332334233523362337233823392340234123422343234423452346234723482349235023512352235323542355235623572358235923602361236223632364236523662367236823692370237123722373237423752376237723782379238023812382238323842385238623872388238923902391239223932394239523962397239823992400240124022403240424052406240724082409241024112412241324142415241624172418241924202421242224232424242524262427242824292430243124322433243424352436243724382439244024412442244324442445244624472448244924502451245224532454245524562457245824592460246124622463246424652466246724682469247024712472247324742475247624772478247924802481248224832484248524862487248824892490249124922493249424952496249724982499250025012502250325042505250625072508250925102511251225132514251525162517251825192520252125222523252425252526252725282529253025312532253325342535253625372538253925402541254225432544254525462547254825492550255125522553255425552556255725582559256025612562256325642565256625672568256925702571257225732574257525762577257825792580258125822583258425852586258725882589259025912592259325942595259625972598259926002601260226032604260526062607260826092610261126122613261426152616261726182619262026212622262326242625262626272628262926302631263226332634263526362637263826392640264126422643264426452646264726482649265026512652265326542655265626572658265926602661266226632664266526662667266826692670267126722673267426752676267726782679268026812682268326842685268626872688268926902691269226932694269526962697269826992700270127022703270427052706270727082709271027112712271327142715271627172718271927202721272227232724272527262727272827292730273127322733273427352736273727382739274027412742274327442745274627472748274927502751275227532754275527562757275827592760276127622763276427652766276727682769277027712772277327742775277627772778277927802781278227832784278527862787278827892790279127922793279427952796279727982799280028012802280328042805280628072808280928102811281228132814281528162817281828192820282128222823282428252826282728282829283028312832283328342835283628372838283928402841284228432844284528462847284828492850285128522853285428552856285728582859286028612862286328642865286628672868286928702871287228732874287528762877287828792880288128822883288428852886288728882889289028912892289328942895289628972898289929002901290229032904290529062907290829092910291129122913291429152916291729182919292029212922292329242925292629272928292929302931293229332934293529362937293829392940294129422943294429452946294729482949295029512952295329542955295629572958295929602961296229632964296529662967296829692970297129722973297429752976297729782979298029812982298329842985298629872988298929902991299229932994299529962997299829993000300130023003300430053006300730083009301030113012301330143015301630173018301930203021302230233024302530263027302830293030303130323033303430353036303730383039304030413042304330443045304630473048304930503051305230533054305530563057305830593060306130623063306430653066306730683069307030713072307330743075307630773078307930803081308230833084308530863087308830893090309130923093309430953096309730983099310031013102310331043105310631073108310931103111311231133114311531163117311831193120312131223123312431253126312731283129313031313132313331343135313631373138313931403141314231433144314531463147314831493150315131523153315431553156315731583159316031613162316331643165316631673168316931703171317231733174317531763177317831793180318131823183318431853186318731883189319031913192319331943195319631973198319932003201320232033204320532063207320832093210321132123213321432153216321732183219322032213222322332243225322632273228322932303231323232333234323532363237323832393240324132423243324432453246324732483249325032513252325332543255325632573258325932603261326232633264326532663267326832693270327132723273327432753276327732783279328032813282328332843285328632873288328932903291329232933294329532963297329832993300330133023303330433053306330733083309331033113312
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd">
<!-- saved from url=(0074)http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.unix-vs-nt.org/kirch/ -->
<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<script type="text/javascript" src="./Microsoft Windows NT Server 4.0 versus UNIX_files/analytics.js"></script><style type="text/css"></style>
<script type="text/javascript">archive_analytics.values.server_name="wwwb-app19.us.archive.org";archive_analytics.values.server_ms=3249;</script>
<link type="text/css" rel="stylesheet" href="./Microsoft Windows NT Server 4.0 versus UNIX_files/banner-styles.css">
<meta name="description" content="UNIX versus Windows NT -
Information every manager should know when planning a corporate network or
the purchase of server hardware.">
<meta name="keywords" content="NT vs UNIX, UNIX vs NT, NT vs. UNIX,
UNIX vs. NT, nt versus unix, unix versus nt, IIS, apache, sendmail,
exchange server, microsoft, smp, aix, hp-ux, digital unix, solaris,
freebsd, bsdi, linux, windows nt, corporate network, mail servers,
operating systems, cost effective solutions, mission critical
operations, sendmail, apache, iis, system administration, microsoft">
<title>Microsoft Windows NT Server 4.0 versus UNIX</title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000"><div id="wm-ipp" lang="en" style="display: none;">
<div style="position:fixed;left:0;top:0;width:100%!important">
<div id="wm-ipp-inside">
<table style="width:100%;"><tbody><tr>
<td id="wm-logo">
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/" title="Wayback Machine home page"><img src="./Microsoft Windows NT Server 4.0 versus UNIX_files/wayback-toolbar-logo.png" alt="Wayback Machine" width="110" height="39" border="0"></a>
</td>
<td class="c">
<table style="margin:0 auto;"><tbody><tr>
<td class="u" colspan="2">
<form target="_top" method="get" action="http://web.archive.org/web/form-submit.jsp" name="wmtb" id="wmtb"><input type="text" name="url" id="wmtbURL" value="http://www.unix-vs-nt.org/kirch/" style="width:400px;" onfocus="this.focus();this.select();"><input type="hidden" name="type" value="replay"><input type="hidden" name="date" value="20000815100517"><input type="submit" value="Go"><span id="wm_tb_options" style="display:block;"></span></form>
</td>
<td class="n" rowspan="2">
<table><tbody>
<!-- NEXT/PREV MONTH NAV AND MONTH INDICATOR -->
<tr class="m">
<td class="b" nowrap="nowrap">
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000706213010/http://www.unix-vs-nt.org/kirch" title="6 Jul 2000">JUL</a>
</td>
<td class="c" id="displayMonthEl" title="You are here: 10:05:17 Aug 15, 2000">AUG</td>
<td class="f" nowrap="nowrap">
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20001017114158/http://unix-vs-nt.org/kirch" title="17 Oct 2000"><strong>OCT</strong></a>
</td>
</tr>
<!-- NEXT/PREV CAPTURE NAV AND DAY OF MONTH INDICATOR -->
<tr class="d">
<td class="b" nowrap="nowrap">
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000706213010/http://www.unix-vs-nt.org/kirch" title="21:30:10 Jul 6, 2000"><img src="./Microsoft Windows NT Server 4.0 versus UNIX_files/wm_tb_prv_on.png" alt="Previous capture" width="14" height="16" border="0"></a>
</td>
<td class="c" id="displayDayEl" style="width:34px;font-size:24px;" title="You are here: 10:05:17 Aug 15, 2000">15</td>
<td class="f" nowrap="nowrap">
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000816171907/http://unix-vs-nt.org/kirch/" title="17:19:07 Aug 16, 2000"><img src="./Microsoft Windows NT Server 4.0 versus UNIX_files/wm_tb_nxt_on.png" alt="Next capture" width="14" height="16" border="0"></a>
</td>
</tr>
<!-- NEXT/PREV YEAR NAV AND YEAR INDICATOR -->
<tr class="y">
<td class="b" nowrap="nowrap">
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/19990508220433/http://unix-vs-nt.org/kirch" title="8 May 1999"><strong>1999</strong></a>
</td>
<td class="c" id="displayYearEl" title="You are here: 10:05:17 Aug 15, 2000">2000</td>
<td class="f" nowrap="nowrap">
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20020205110720/http://www.unix-vs-nt.org/kirch/" title="5 Feb 2002"><strong>2002</strong></a>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="s">
<a class="t" href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517*/http://www.unix-vs-nt.org/kirch/" title="See a list of every capture for this URL">179 captures</a>
<div class="r" title="Timespan for captures of this URL">17 Jan 99 - 6 May 16</div>
</td>
<td class="k">
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.unix-vs-nt.org/kirch/" id="wm-graph-anchor">
<div id="wm-ipp-sparkline" title="Explore captures for this URL">
<img id="sparklineImgId" alt="sparklines" onmouseover="__wm.st(1)" onmouseout="__wm.st(0)" onmousemove="__wm.mv(event,this)" width="525" height="27" border="0" src="./Microsoft Windows NT Server 4.0 versus UNIX_files/graph.jsp">
<div class="yt" style="display: none; width: 25px; height: 27px;"></div><div class="mt" style="display: none; width: 2px; height: 27px;"></div></div>
</a>
</td>
</tr></tbody></table>
</td>
<td class="r">
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.unix-vs-nt.org/kirch/#close" onclick="__wm.h();return false;" style="background-image:url(/static/images/toolbar/wm_tb_close.png);top:5px;" title="Close the toolbar">Close</a>
<a href="http://faq.web.archive.org/" style="background-image:url(/static/images/toolbar/wm_tb_help.png);bottom:5px;" title="Get some help using the Wayback Machine">Help</a>
</td>
</tr></tbody></table>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<!-- BEGIN WAYBACK TOOLBAR INSERT -->
<script type="text/javascript" src="./Microsoft Windows NT Server 4.0 versus UNIX_files/disclaim-element.js"></script>
<script type="text/javascript" src="./Microsoft Windows NT Server 4.0 versus UNIX_files/graph-calc.js"></script>
<script type="text/javascript">//<![CDATA[
var __wm = (function(imgWidth,imgHeight,yearImgWidth,monthImgWidth){
var wbPrefix = "/web/";
var wbCurrentUrl = "http://www.unix-vs-nt.org/kirch/";
var firstYear = 1996;
var displayDay = "15";
var displayMonth = "Aug";
var displayYear = "2000";
var prettyMonths = ["Jan","Feb","Mar","Apr","May","Jun","Jul","Aug","Sep","Oct","Nov","Dec"];
var $D=document,$=function(n){return document.getElementById(n)};
var trackerVal,curYear = -1,curMonth = -1;
var yearTracker,monthTracker;
function showTrackers(val) {
if (val===trackerVal) return;
var $ipp=$("wm-ipp");
var $y=$("displayYearEl"),$m=$("displayMonthEl"),$d=$("displayDayEl");
if (val) {
$ipp.className="hi";
} else {
$ipp.className="";
$y.innerHTML=displayYear;$m.innerHTML=displayMonth;$d.innerHTML=displayDay;
}
yearTracker.style.display=val?"inline":"none";
monthTracker.style.display=val?"inline":"none";
trackerVal = val;
}
function trackMouseMove(event,element) {
var eventX = getEventX(event);
var elementX = getElementX(element);
var xOff = Math.min(Math.max(0, eventX - elementX),imgWidth);
var monthOff = xOff % yearImgWidth;
var year = Math.floor(xOff / yearImgWidth);
var monthOfYear = Math.min(11,Math.floor(monthOff / monthImgWidth));
// 1 extra border pixel at the left edge of the year:
var month = (year * 12) + monthOfYear;
var day = monthOff % 2==1?15:1;
var dateString = zeroPad(year + firstYear) + zeroPad(monthOfYear+1,2) +
zeroPad(day,2) + "000000";
$("displayYearEl").innerHTML=year+firstYear;
$("displayMonthEl").innerHTML=prettyMonths[monthOfYear];
// looks too jarring when it changes..
//$("displayDayEl").innerHTML=zeroPad(day,2);
var url = wbPrefix + dateString + '/' + wbCurrentUrl;
$("wm-graph-anchor").href=url;
if(curYear != year) {
var yrOff = year * yearImgWidth;
yearTracker.style.left = yrOff + "px";
curYear = year;
}
if(curMonth != month) {
var mtOff = year + (month * monthImgWidth) + 1;
monthTracker.style.left = mtOff + "px";
curMonth = month;
}
}
function hideToolbar() {
$("wm-ipp").style.display="none";
}
function bootstrap() {
var $spk=$("wm-ipp-sparkline");
yearTracker=$D.createElement('div');
yearTracker.className='yt';
with(yearTracker.style){
display='none';width=yearImgWidth+"px";height=imgHeight+"px";
}
monthTracker=$D.createElement('div');
monthTracker.className='mt';
with(monthTracker.style){
display='none';width=monthImgWidth+"px";height=imgHeight+"px";
}
$spk.appendChild(yearTracker);
$spk.appendChild(monthTracker);
var $ipp=$("wm-ipp");
$ipp&&disclaimElement($ipp);
}
return{st:showTrackers,mv:trackMouseMove,h:hideToolbar,bt:bootstrap};
})(525, 27, 25, 2);//]]>
</script>
<style type="text/css">
body {
margin-top:0 !important;
padding-top:0 !important;
min-width:800px !important;
}
</style>
<script type="text/javascript">__wm.bt();</script>
<!-- END WAYBACK TOOLBAR INSERT -->
<center>
<table width="85%" cellspacing="0">
<tbody><tr>
<td>
<center>
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.unix-vs-nt.org/kirch/translations/chinese/">
Chinese</a>
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://linux.hr/misc/hr_unix-nt.html">
Croatian</a>
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.penguin.cz/~had/unix-nt/">
Czech</a>
<!--A HREF="/web/20000815100517/http://www.eleves.ens.fr/home/blondeel/traduc/kirch/unix-vs-nt.html"-->
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.linux-france.com/article/these/unix-vs-nt/unix-vs-nt.html">
French</a>
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.lot-germany.com/magazin/unix-nt.htm">
German</a>
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://adhi.linux-smg.or.id/unix-vs-nt/ID-unix-vs-nt.html">
Indonesia</a>
<p>
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.ne.jp/asahi/personal/kobayashi-osamu/Translation/kirch.net/unix-nt.j.html">
Japanese</a>
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.linuxkorea.co.kr/news/internet/unix-nt.html">
Korean</a>
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.microlink.com.br/~buick/dragons/op1/unixvsnt.html">
Portuguese</a>
<!--A HREF="translations/russian.html"-->
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.atlas.net.ru/unix-nt/unix-nt.html">
Russian</a>
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.fisica.uson.mx/carlos/Unix-NT/unix-nt-notes.html">
Spanish</a>
</p><p>
</p><hr>
<b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.unix-vs-nt.org/kirch/updates.html">
Recent Updates</a></b>
<b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.unix-vs-nt.org/cgi-bin/count?kirch">
Access Counter</a></b>
<b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.unix-vs-nt.org/kirch/">
Mirror</a></b>
<hr>
</center>
</td></tr></tbody></table>
<table width="85%" cellspacing="0">
<tbody><tr>
<td>
<h1>Microsoft Windows NT Server 4.0 versus UNIX</h1>
<h3>by</h3>
<h3>John Kirch</h3>
<h3>Networking Consultant and
Microsoft Certified Professional (Windows NT)</h3>
<p><i>Last update: 7 August 1999</i>
</p></td></tr></tbody></table>
<table width="85%" cellspacing="0">
<tbody><tr>
<td>
<hr>
<h2>Executive Summary</h2>
<p>IT managers worldwide are being confronted with the question, should
we go with Microsoft Windows NT Server or one of the UNIX operating
systems? As you may already know, UNIX is not a single operating
system; it refers to a family of operating systems which includes AIX,
BSDI, Digital UNIX, FreeBSD, HP-UX, IRIX, Linux, NetBSD, OpenBSD,
Pyramid, SCO, Solaris, SunOS, just to name the more prominent ones.
Windows NT Server is increasing in popularity, but is it increasing the
productivity of your MIS operations? Most important of all, though,
for you as a manager is, are you increasing the profits of your company
when you choose a Microsoft solution?
</p><p>The bottom line is, which is cheaper? Hardware costs, software
licenses, technical support agreements, prices of upgrades/service
packs, costs of hardware upgrades, profits lost for every hour of
downtime, personnel costs for recovering/recreating data lost due to
product defects in the operating system and/or hardware platform
required by your choice of operating systems, and personnel costs for
systems administrators, these are only some of the factors that
contribute to the overall budget resulting from your decision. It is
not a trivial consideration.
</p><p>Although money is the bottom line for you as a manager, given the
complex set of factors I've just presented, a technically superior
combination of server hardware and operating systems could prove to be
less expensive in the long run. UNIX is a mature, technically superior
group of operating systems with a proven track record for performance,
reliability, and security in a server environment. The almost thirty
years of continual development, performed often by volunteers who
believe in what they're doing, has produced a group of operating
systems--and extremely powerful multiprocessor server hardware
tailor-made to its needs, whose performance is still unparalleled by
Intel hardware--that not only meets the demands of today's computing
needs, but in many cases exceeds them.
</p><p>Why Windows NT Server 4.0 continues to exist in the enterprise would
be a topic appropriate for an investigative report in the field of
psychology or marketing, not an article on information technology.
Technically, Windows NT Server 4.0 is no match for any UNIX operating
system, not even the non-commercial BSDs or Linux. A manager is not
expected to have the technical expertise of a systems administrator
with 15 years of industry experience. There is no shame in not having
the facts, only in being ignorant of such facts, which will in the end
cost your employer, and eventually all consumers, money. The aim of
this article is to give you the resources which will enable you to make
thoughtful and informed decisions regarding your organization's
IT planning and operations.
</p><p>The following article relies on my experience in this industry,
which started back in 1979 with Chevron Geosciences Company, and on
roughly 150 links to other technical articles, white papers, and
executive summaries. At this point it should be noted that I am not
promoting the product of any one company, nor would my employer benefit
should you choose UNIX. My goal is to ease the burden of systems
administrators, promote more efficient and economical computing
worldwide, and encourage a more fair and diverse community of software
vendors.
</p><hr>
</td></tr></tbody></table>
<table width="85%">
<tbody><tr>
<td valign="TOP">
<h2>Contents</h2>
<ul>
<li><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.unix-vs-nt.org/kirch/#intro">Introduction</a>
</li><li><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.unix-vs-nt.org/kirch/#os">Operating Systems</a>
<ul>
<li><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.unix-vs-nt.org/kirch/#costs">Product costs and licensing issues</a>
</li><li><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.unix-vs-nt.org/kirch/#functionality">Functionality</a>
</li><li><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.unix-vs-nt.org/kirch/#reliability">Reliability</a>
</li><li><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.unix-vs-nt.org/kirch/#management">System Management</a>
</li><li><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.unix-vs-nt.org/kirch/#performance">Performance</a>
</li><li><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.unix-vs-nt.org/kirch/#security">Security</a>
</li></ul>
</li><li><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.unix-vs-nt.org/kirch/#misconceptions">Some Common Misconceptions</a>
</li><li><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.unix-vs-nt.org/kirch/#views">Views of Other MIS Professionals</a>
<ul>
<li><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.unix-vs-nt.org/kirch/feedback/">
Feedback from Readers of this Article</a>
</li>
</ul>
</li><li><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.unix-vs-nt.org/kirch/#web">Web Servers</a>
</li><li><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.unix-vs-nt.org/kirch/#conclusion">Conclusion</a>
</li><li><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.unix-vs-nt.org/kirch/#compare">Linux and NT Server 4.0 at a Glance</a>
</li><li><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.unix-vs-nt.org/kirch/#bigguys">What are Major Companies Deploying?</a>
</li><li><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.unix-vs-nt.org/kirch/#links">Related Links</a>
</li><li><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.unix-vs-nt.org/legal.html">Disclaimers and Other Legal Information</a>
</li><li><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.unix-vs-nt.org/kirch/#acknowledgments">Acknowledgments</a>
</li></ul>
</td><td valign="TOP">
<h2><a name="highlights">Highlights in this Article</a></h2>
<ul>
<li><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.unix-vs-nt.org/kirch/#ms-solaris">Why Microsoft uses Solaris instead of NT</a>
</li><li><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.unix-vs-nt.org/kirch/#ms-summit">Microsoft admits that NT trails Solaris</a>
</li><li><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.unix-vs-nt.org/kirch/#graphs">Graphical comparison of the various operating systems</a>
</li><li><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.unix-vs-nt.org/kirch/#stability">Which operating systems do professionals choose when
stability is the most important issue?</a>
</li><li><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.unix-vs-nt.org/kirch/#win95">A little-known fact about <b>windows95.com</b></a>
</li><li><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.unix-vs-nt.org/kirch/#KickAss">UNIX on a single processor PC outperforms a dual processor
NT machine?</a>
</li><li><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.unix-vs-nt.org/kirch/#cisco">Cisco changing from Linux to Windows NT?</a>
</li><li><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.unix-vs-nt.org/kirch/#usps">Linux and the United States Postal Service</a>
</li><li><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.unix-vs-nt.org/kirch/#web">Web Server software; What do the Royal Family and the
FBI have in common?</a>
</li><li><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.unix-vs-nt.org/kirch/#gui">Show me some UNIX, I want to <i>see</i> what it looks like!</a>
</li><li><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.netcraft.com/cgi-bin/Survey/whats">
What is that Site Running?</a>
</li><li><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.unix-vs-nt.org/resources.html">FreeBSD and Linux Resources with
answers to the following questions:</a>
<ul>
<li>Where can I get Linux/FreeBSD to try this out?
</li><li>Where can I buy a workstation/server with Linux/FreeBSD
pre-installed?
</li><li>Where can I find a consultant for these operating systems?
</li></ul>
</li></ul>
</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<table width="85%" cellspacing="0">
<tbody><tr>
<td>
<p>
</p><hr>
<h2><a name="intro">Introduction</a></h2>
The choice of server platforms can be difficult for managers who do not
have highly specialized training in systems and network administration.
In this paper, Microsoft Windows NT Server is compared to UNIX, a large
family of commercial and non-commercial operating systems with a common
heritage and many similarities. The main focus of the comparison is on
the areas of functionality, reliability, system management, and
performance. This paper is about servers, not workstations. Other
factors, such as product pricing, quantity and quality of bundled
software, and a section on common misconceptions about both groups of
operating systems are presented to provide a more complete view of
these products. The information used in this comparison is derived
from a variety of sources: white papers, case studies by third parties,
articles from technical periodicals, and observations made by IT
professionals who have industry experience in the implementation and
administration of both Microsoft Windows NT and various UNIX operating
systems.
<p>This article should be considered a work in progress. Anyone
wishing to contribute to this project is welcome to send me <a href="mailto:feedback@unix-vs-nt.org"><b>e-mail</b></a>. Please confine your
e-mail to <i>constructive</i> comments or criticism.
</p><hr>
<h2><a name="os">Operating Systems</a></h2>
<h3><a name="costs">Product costs and licensing issues</a></h3>
<p>Most managers will agree that the mere cost of an operating system
is trivial when looking at the big picture. Although Windows NT Server
4.0 can be more expensive than some commercial UNIX operating systems,
it can be had for trivial amounts at trade shows.
</p><p>
</p><center>
<b>Price List for Windows NT Server 4.0 (Source:
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.microsoft.com/products/prodref/458_pr_st.htm">Microsoft</a>)</b>
</center>
</td></tr></tbody></table>
<center>
<table border="2">
<tbody><tr>
<th>Product</th><th>Price (US-$)
</th></tr><tr>
<td>NT Server 4.0 (5-user version)
</td><td align="RIGHT">$809
</td></tr><tr>
<td>NT Server 4.0 (10-user version)
</td><td align="RIGHT">$1,129
</td></tr><tr>
<td>NT Server 4.0 Enterprise Edition (25-user version)
</td><td align="RIGHT">$3,999
</td></tr><tr>
<td>NT Server 4.0 Enterprise Edition (50-user version)
</td><td align="RIGHT">$4,799
</td></tr><tr>
<td>NT Server 4.0 Documentation Kit
</td><td align="RIGHT">$69.95
</td></tr><tr>
<td>20 Quantity Client License
</td><td align="RIGHT">$329
</td></tr><tr>
<td>Single Quantity Client License
</td><td align="RIGHT">$19.95
</td></tr></tbody></table>
</center>
<p>
<table width="85%" cellspacing="0">
<tbody><tr>
<td>
Is NT Server really worth its price? See <b>
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.zdnet.com/pccomp/features/fea0797/nt/sub6.html">
NT Lies: Lie 6 - NT Server is worth more</a></b>. What
is not trivial, however, is that a networked operating system in this
price range should ship without a telnet server, SMTP server (e-mail),
disk quotas, news server, or at least a DNS server that works to
customers' satisfaction (many NT administrators feel compelled to go
with third party DNS solutions). In order to match the functionality of
a BSDI installation, additional Microsoft products and third-party
solutions would bring the final price of a comparable NT solution to
around $4,000, according to <b>
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.bsdi.com/white-papers/compare">BSDI</a></b>.
Maggie Biggs, a senior analyst in the InfoWorld who specializes in
database technology and application design, development, and deployment
via intranets and other networks, estimates a price of <b>$4,636 for a
comparable Windows NT 4.0 solution</b> in her <b>
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://currents.net/magazine/national/1524/inet1524.html">
article</a></b> which compares NT 4.0 to Red Hat's <i>commercial</i>
Linux (for only <b>$49.95</b>).
Here one sees that successful marketing can often distract customers
from considering their need for functionality.
<p>NT is often chosen for budget reasons since many customers are not
willing to pay for the more expensive hardware required by most
commercial flavors of UNIX. More important, however, is the overall
cost of implementation which includes system administration along with
several other factors like downtime, telephone support calls, loss of
data due to unreliability, etc. For a more detailed discussion of NT's
hidden costs, see the following
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.informationweek.com/">
InformationWeek</a> article:
</p><blockquote>
"Windows NT systems carry lower sticker prices than
their Unix counterparts, but ongoing maintenance and
support requirements can make them much more costly
to run."
<p>
-- Martin J. Garvey,
<b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.informationweek.com/692/92iuhid.htm">
The Hidden Cost Of NT</a></b>,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.informationweek.com/">
InformationWeek</a>, 20 July 1998.
</p></blockquote>
<p>Tippett Studio, the company
responsible for the graphics in <i>Starship Trooper</i>, which received
an Oscar nomination for Best Special Effects, uses 130 SGI (
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.sgi.com/">Silicon Graphics, Inc.</a>) machines running
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.sgi.com/origin/products/irix.html">IRIX</a>, SGI's
very own UNIX operating system. Tippett's studio operations manager
explains why they use SGI with IRIX instead of an NT solution:
</p><blockquote>
"'SGIs are cheap for what they do,' says Tippett's Jeff Stringer, the
studio's operations manager. 'The cost of maintaining an NT system is
pretty high when you think of all the system administrators you have to
hire.'"
<p>"Hiring is an especially big concern for the small studio. Unlike
the super-studios, Tippett -- which designed the bugs that threaten
humanity in "Starship Troopers" -- is an f/x boutique."
</p><p>-- Greg Lindsay,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://cgi.pathfinder.com/netly/article/0,2334,13125,00.html">
Oscar Tech</a>, The Netly News, 27 February 1998.
</p></blockquote>
<p>For the most cost-conscious customer,
<b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.linux.org/">Linux</a></b>,
<b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.freebsd.org/">FreeBSD</a></b>,
<b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.netbsd.org/">NetBSD</a></b>, or
<b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.openbsd.org/">OpenBSD</a></b>
would be the obvious choices. They cost <i>nothing</i>, yet they are
just as stable and offer as much functionality as, if not more than,
the commercial UNIX operating systems.
</p><p>Journalists R. Scott Raynovich and Polly Sprenger at <i>LAN Times</i>
indirectly point out the flexibility of the
<b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.opensource.org/">Open Source</a></b> concept
in their recent article on Linux and how
commercial organizations can benefit from it:
</p><blockquote>
" . . . Linux
can be downloaded for free over the Internet or obtained
inexpensively with support and documentation from a
number of commercial vendors. This makes it an
attractive product for companies trying to reduce the
cost of licensing and managing OSes.
<p>-- R. Scott Raynovich and Polly Sprenger,
<b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.lantimes.com/98/98aug/808b001a.html?st.ne.fd.mnaw">
Linux legitimacy rallies NT skeptics</a></b>,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.lantimes.com/">LAN Times</a>,
17 August 1998.
</p></blockquote>
In <a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.softwaremagazine.com/">Software Magazine</a>'s
recent cover story on Linux, Ann Harrison points out how even large
companies are finding a cost effective alternative to Microsoft in the
deployment of Linux servers:
<blockquote>
"Randy Kessell, manager of technical analysis for a Southwestern Bell
operation center, notes that
because Linux allows his company to do more remote network
administration and software loads
than was possible with either Microsoft or NetWare products, it has
driven down their network management costs."
<p>-- Ann Harrison,
<b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.softwaremag.com/Sept98/sm098cv.htm">
In LINUX We . . .</a></b>,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.softwaremagazine.com/">
Software Magazine</a>, Cover Story, September 1998.
</p></blockquote>
<p>One reader informed me that
mentioning Linux would detract from the credibility of this article. I
beg to differ. The existence of such alliances as mentioned in the
article
<b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.techweb.com/wire/story/TWB19980402S0013">
Andreessen Sees Mozilla-Linux Upset of Windows</a></b> clearly shows
that Linux is strengthening its presence in commercial environments.
(For newcomers to this arena, Mozilla is the name of the
Netscape/Communicator code and Marc Andreessen is Cofounder and
Executive VP of Products at Netscape.) Also noteworthy is a new
alliance between
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.sun.com/">Sun Microsystems</a> and <a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.li.org/">Linux International</a>.
(<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://slashdot.org/">Slashdot</a>:
<b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://slashdot.org/articles/9804211730214.shtml">
Sun Joins Linux International</a></b>, 21 May 1998)
Yet another recent development is <a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.corel.com/">Corel</a>'s special relationship with
Linux:
</p><blockquote>
". . . <a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.corel.com/">Corel</a>, which has already
announced plans to build a Linux-based network computer, said it will
next month post free Linux-based development tools to its Web site,
joining a number of software companies supporting the Linux open source
movement."<br>
-- Erich Luening,
<b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,21929,00.html">
Corel joins Linux fest</a></b>,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.news.com/">CNET News.Com</a>, 8 May 1998.
</blockquote>
<p>The very latest headlines indicate that Linux is well on its way into
the major leagues:
<b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/zdnn_smgraph_display/0,3441,2121004,00.html">
Informix, Oracle ready to port to Linux</a></b>
(<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.zdnet.com/pcweek/">PCWeek Online</a>, 20 July 1998),
<b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.zdnet.com/pcweek/news/0720/20morac.html">
Oracle to port database to Linux</a></b>
(<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.zdnet.com/pcweek/">PCWeek Online</a>, 20 July 1998),
and
<b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,20863,00.html?st.ne.ni.rel">
Netscape: Linux a top priority</a></b>
(<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.news.com/">CNET News.Com</a>, 7 April 1998).
</p><p>Historically, large corporations have steered clear of free software
due to the unfounded assumption that anything free can't be worthwhile.
The recent trend among some corporations is to use these
cost-effective operating systems. Hewlett-Packard used Linux instead
of its own HP-UX operating system "to port the Carnegie Mellon Mach
kernel to HP
PA-RISC in order to use it for their imagery work."
(<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.ssc.com/lj/issue44/2355.html">
full story</a>) Schlumberger chose Linux over SCO for its new point of sale computers.
(<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.ssc.com/lj/">
Linux Journal</a>, November 1997, Issue 43, pp. 83-4) It is
interesting to note that <b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.sun.com/">SunWorld
On-Line</a></b> gives Linux positive press in one of its articles, <b>
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.sun.com/sunworldonline/swol-01-1998/swol-01-linux.html">
Linux lines up for the enterprise</a></b>.
</p><p>The September 1998
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.softwaremagazine.com/">Software Magazine</a>
cover story reveals just how far Linux has managed to infiltrate
corporate America and how it is not about to go away:
</p><blockquote>
"Tim Payne, director of
database marketing at Oracle, says many of his company's corporate
customers have made large
investments in Linux. When Oracle announced in July that it would be
offering 24x7 support for
Oracle8 on Linux, he says 300 customers called the next day asking
about availability. 'It's reliable,
it's proven, it runs on commodity Intel boxes, and it's a really
low-cost alternative to NT,' says
Payne. 'The fact that you are going to be able to get enterprise
quality support from Oracle to deploy on
the Linux platform will help customers adopt Linux.'
<p>-- Ann Harrison,
<b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.softwaremag.com/Sept98/sm098cv.htm">
In LINUX We . . .</a></b>,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.softwaremagazine.com/">
Software Magazine</a>, Cover Story, September 1998.
</p></blockquote>
<p>Since these operating
systems are free for use even in commercial environments, many ISPs run
on Linux or FreeBSD. NetBSD will run on practically anything: DEC
Alpha, Motorola 68k (Amiga, Atari, Mac, MVME, Sharp, Sun3), PowerPC,
Intel, DEC VAX, Acorn RISC, MIPS (Sony NEWS, DECstation), etc.
OpenBSD's primary focus is on correctness and security. Linux is the
most popular and will run on a wide range hardware: Sun, Intel, DEC
Alpha, PowerPC, PowerMac, etc.
Paul Krill's recent articles in
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.infoworld.com/">InfoWorld</a>
(<b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.infoworld.com/cgi-bin/displayStory.pl?980710.whlinux.htm">
Linux picking up steam</a></b> and <b>
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.infoworld.com/cgi-bin/displayStory.pl?980715.ehlinux.htm">
Linux supporters rally around freeware OS</a></b>) focus on the ever
increasing support of major vendors and future plans for added
functionality, i.e. support for Intel's 64-bit Merced processor.
Currently, Linux is perhaps the fastest
growing operating system on the market. For more information, see <b>
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.linuxresources.com/">Linux Resources</a></b> or <b>
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.redhat.com/">Red Hat Software</a></b>.
</p><p>Nicholas Petreley, editor-in-chief of <i>NC World</i> and columnist
for <i>InfoWorld</i> and <i>NT World Japan</i> provides an explanation
for the rise of Linux and FreeBSD in IT departments:
</p><blockquote>
"Yesterday's college students learned their UNIX expertise on Linux and
FreeBSD. Today they're working in IT departments, and many of them are
openly hostile to both Microsoft and Windows NT. As a result, Linux,
BSD, Solaris, and other forms of UNIX are finding their way into IT
departments, both overtly and on the sly.
<p>"For example, are you sure that's an NT server you're connecting to
at work? IS employees in many corporations have secretly installed UNIX
servers that provide native NT services. Why take such a risk? Linux
and FreeBSD are free, as is SAMBA, the software that provides NT
services. So the IS department saves money. And managers are unlikely
to find out UNIX is behind the scenes because fewer people will
complain about server downtime.
</p><p>"Fewer people will complain because the servers are more stable than
Windows NT. Linux, FreeBSD, and BSDI UNIX outperform Windows NT by a
wide margin on limited hardware, and under some circumstances can
perform as well or better than NT on the best hardware. Once behind in
scalability features, UNIX on Intel is catching up and may soon surpass
NT in the number of processors it can use, and how it uses them.
</p><p>-- Nicholas Petreley,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.ncworldmag.com/ncworld/ncw-04-1998/ncw-04-nextten.html">
The new UNIX alters NT's orbit: The re-emergence of UNIX threatens to
modify the future direction of NT</a>,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.ncworldmag.com/ncworld/">
<i>NC World</i></a>, April 1998.
</p></blockquote>
<p>Even <a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.economist.com/">The Economist</a> is now
reporting on the rising popularity of Linux:
</p><blockquote>
"Oracle, a database firm, is planning to offer Linux versions of some
of its software. . . . Even without such endorsements, Linux has
achieved a measure of success. In only a few
years, the program has evolved from a hacker's toy into software that
is, at least in part,
technically superior to Windows NT.
<p>-- Stephen Morley,
<b>Revenge of the hackers</b>*
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.economist.com/">The Economist</a>,
July 11th - 17th 1998.<br>
* Hyperlink is gone. Can be purchased from <i>The Economist</i>
via their online archive.
</p></blockquote>
<h3><a name="functionality">Functionality</a></h3>
What can you expect from Windows NT Server out of the box and from UNIX
out of the box? NT can communicate with many different types of
computers. So can UNIX. NT can secure sensitive data and keep
unauthorized users off the network. So can UNIX. Essentially, both
operating systems meet the minimum requirements for operating systems
functioning in a networked environment. Put briefly, UNIX can do
anything that NT can do and more.
<p>NT is often considered to be a "multi-user" operating system, but
this is very misleading. An NT server will <i>validate</i> an
authorized user, but once the user is logged on to the NT network, all
he/she can do is access files and printers. The NT user cannot just
run <i>any</i> application on the NT server (in order to take advantage
of the superior processing power of server hardware). An NT user can
only run special applications that have been written in two pieces,
i.e. client/server applications. When a user logs in to a UNIX
server, he/she can then run <i>any</i> application (provided the user
is authorized to do so), thus taking the processing load off his/her
workstation. This also includes graphics-based applications since
X-server software is standard issue on all UNIX operating systems.
</p><p>For most businesses, e-mail has become an indispensable tool for
communication, and most companies run their own internal/external
e-mail systems. With Windows NT, you will have to buy a separate
software package in order to set up an e-mail server. UNIX operating
systems come with a program called <b>
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.sendmail.org/">Sendmail</a></b>. There are other
mail server software packages (or <i>MTAs</i>, Mail Transport Agents)
available for UNIX, but this one is the most widely used, and it is
free. Some UNIX administrators feel that
<b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.exim.org/">exim</a></b> or
<b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.qmail.org/">qmail</a></b> are better choices
since they are not as difficult to configure as sendmail. Both exim
and qmail, like sendmail as well, are free for use even in a commercial
environment.
Many NT-based companies use
<b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.microsoft.com/exchange/default.asp">
Microsoft Exchange Server</a></b>
as their MTA. This is an expensive solution with limited success in an
enterprise environment. <b>Microsoft Exchange Server Enterprise
Edition - 25 Client Access Licenses costs $3,549.00.</b>
If you have more than 25 employees, the same package with <b>50 Client
Access Licenses costs $4,859.00</b> (Source:
<b>
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.microsoft.com/exchange/55/gen/pricing.htm">Microsoft</a></b>)
For more information on this topic see
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.unix-vs-nt.org/kirch/sendmail-exchange.html">
Microsoft Exchange versus Sendmail:
Views of Other MIS Professionals</a>.
</p><p>Since Microsoft sees NT as a viable alternative to all other
network-capable operating systems on the market, UNIX and Novell
included, one would assume that NT would come with all the tools
necessary to accomplish the most basic tasks required: file and
printer services. Any systems/network administrator knows from
experience that there are two important issues to be considered when
setting up a file server or adding a new network user: security, i.e.
passwords and file permissions; and quotas for limiting disk usage of
any new or existing users or groups. Although NT provides basic
password security, it only provides file-level security if you choose
to use its proprietary filesystem called NTFS. More important than
this issue, however, is that <b>NT does not provide any mechanism for
limiting a user's disk usage!</b> UNIX and Novell, on the other hand,
provide software for performing this seemingly elementary control.
Microsoft has announced, however, that its not yet released NT Server
5.0 will provide "new storage management features such as disk quotas .
. ." (see their press release, <a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.microsoft.com/corpinfo/press/1997/sept97/winnt5pr.htm">
Windows NT 5.0 Beta Delivered to Over 200,000 Developers</a>).
</p><p>Another disk related design flaw in the Microsoft suite of operating
systems is its antiquated use of "drive letters," i.e. drive C:, drive
D:, etc. This schema imposes hardware specific limitations on system
administrators and users alike. This is highly inappropriate for
client/server environments where network shares and file systems are
to represent hierarchies meaningful to humans. UNIX allows shared
network filesystems to be mounted at any point in a directory structure.
A network share can also span multiple disk drives (or even different
machines!) in UNIX, thus
allowing administrators to maintain pre-existing directory structures
that are well-known to users, yet allowing them to expand the available
disk space on the server, making such system changes transparent to
users. This single difference between the UNIX and Windows operating
systems further underscores the original intentions of their respective
designers: UNIX was conceived as a client/server operating system for
professional use, whereas Windows and its descendents sprang from DOS,
an operating system that was never intended to be a player in a
client/server environment, much less a server. For more detailed
information on this topic, see Nicholas Petreley's article
<b>
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.infoworld.com/cgi-bin/displayNew.pl?/petrel/np102896.htm">
It will take less drive to make most PC operating
systems work like Unix</a></b>.
</p><p>Last but not least, UNIX operating systems are equipped with
scripting languages (Bourne Shell, Korn Shell, C Shell, and sometimes
Perl, just to name a few) and a "cron" facility for scheduling jobs to
run at fixed intervals (every <i>n</i> minutes, every <i>n</i> hours,
once a week, once a month, etc.). Cron scheduling is highly
configurable and not just limited to these examples here. In short,
high-level scripting languages + cron = a powerful resource for system
administration, the likes of which cannot be found in Microsoft NT
Server 4.0. A great deal of UNIX system administration is automated
and customized for site-specific needs through the use of these tools,
which in effect cuts down on personnel costs. As one reader pointed
out, NT does have a "Scheduler" and an "at" command, and that Perl is
available for NT. Yes, this is true, however, I don't feel that NT's
limited cmd.exe scripting environment combined with the "Scheduler" or
"at" can even begin to approach the functionality offered by the UNIX
tools I've mentioned. One reader, Neil McKellar, provided an excellent
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.unix-vs-nt.org/kirch/feedback/neil_mckellar.job_scheduling.html">
example</a>
which supports this statement.
</p><p>Running automated tasks is only useful when the
scripts/tasks/executables can be run without human intervention. So
much that runs on NT is GUI-based, and thus, requires interaction with
a human administrator. If seen realistically, the types of automated
tasks that are being run in most shops are site-specific routines that
have to be programmed by system administrators. Based on my own
industry experience, it is a rare site indeed where Perl is installed
on NT servers and there is any NT administrator who knows the first
thing about Perl. The driving force behind buying cheap hardware goes
hand-in-hand with the hiring practice of selecting the cheapest NT
administrators available; after all, it's NT, all you have to do is
point and click!
</p><p>To summarize, once you logon to an NT network, all you can do is
read files and print. In a UNIX environment, once you log in to a UNIX
server, you can <i>be</i> on that machine and do anything on it that
you could do if you were sitting at its keyboard <i>and mouse!</i> With
NT, don't plan on being able to set up an e-mail server with the
software at hand. You will need to buy expensive mail server software
like Microsoft Exchange Server separately. If your NT server should
function as a file server - what else can you do with it really? -
don't plan on being able to prevent users from crashing the server by
filling up the disk(s) with their data.
</p><p>Ease of configuration and being able to configure a server without
causing downtime is yet another aspect of functionality:
</p><blockquote>
"Some versions of UNIX (Linux, for example) support loadable device
modules. This means you can boot Linux and reconfigure its support for
hardware and software on the fly. For example, you can boot Linux
without support for the SCSI card you have installed. You simply load
support for that SCSI card when you need to access one or more of the
SCSI-connected devices, such as an optical disk for backup. You can
unload the SCSI driver when you're finished. You can also freely load
and unload support for sound cards, network cards -- even file systems
such as HPFS, FAT, VFAT, and others (an NTFS driver is in the works).
<p>"Any UNIX with loadable module support is therefore by nature more
appropriate for a server environment because almost all configuration
changes do not require system restarts.
</p><p>"Windows NT doesn't even come close. Even insignificant changes to a
Windows NT configuration require or request a shutdown and reboot in
order to make the changes take effect. Change the IP address of your
default gateway and you need to reboot. You can't even change the type
of modem you use for a dial-up PPP connection without a reboot to
update the system. None of these limitations exist in UNIX.
</p><p>-- Nicholas Petreley,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.ncworldmag.com/ncworld/ncw-04-1998/ncw-04-nextten.html">
The new UNIX alters NT's orbit: The re-emergence of UNIX threatens to
modify the future direction of NT</a>,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.ncworldmag.com/ncworld/">
<i>NC World</i></a>, April 1998.
</p></blockquote>
<p>When it comes to more sophisticated networking functionality, it
seems that Microsoft's NT Server 4.0 Enterprise Edition can't hold a
candle to the more mature commercial UNIX operating systems. Although
not essential to network performance, 64-bit computing is here today
with these UNIX operating systems (as opposed to NT's 32-bit operating
system). D.H. Brown Associates Inc. reports the results of their
analysis as follows (the following quotation along with the table and
the three graphs immediately following the table are excerpts from a
Web page on Digital Equipment Corporation's site entitled
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.unix.digital.com/unix/v4/dhbrown/AIX43.htm">
AIX 4.3 Leaps To 64-Bits In Dead Heat With Digital UNIX 4.0</a>):
</p><blockquote>
AIX 4.3 takes the lead in Internet/intranet networking features
by providing the broadest set of TCP/IP extensions and adding
value with a bundled Notes server. Digital UNIX comes in second
place with strong network security capabilities, bundling not
only Web-browsing capabilities but also Web-authoring tools, with
Navigator Gold, and a solid set of TCP/IP extensions. However,
Digital UNIX lacks advanced NFS features such as CacheFS and
AutoFS. IRIX 6.4 places third, bundling CacheFS and AutoFS, and
network security features almost as strong as Digital's. But IRIX
lacks network time facilities (NTP) and TCP/IP capabilities such
as IPv6 and IPSec. Sun follows, with good support for NFS
functions and the second-place array of TCP/IP extensions.
However, Sun relies on its own Web server, rather than Netscape,
Microsoft or Apache, and lacks authoring tools as well as
important services such as Novell's NDS directory service. HP
provides strong Internet support within HP-UX, bolstered by its
good showing in advanced Internet protocol function and network
security, while lagging behind in support for advanced NFS
capability. HP-UX, along with AIX, has also established a lead in
supporting NDS. While Microsoft NT 4.0 provides Internet/intranet
support that overall rates as "Good," NT lags behind
the leading UNIX vendors due to poor support for directory
services, network security, NFS, and few TCP/IP extensions.
Microsoft has largely focused adding value to its bundled Web
server product and to tuning its Java Virtual Machine.
</blockquote>
</td></tr></tbody></table>
<table border="1">
<tbody><tr><td width="226"></td>
<td width="62"><center><font size="2" color="#000000">HP-UX
11.0</font></center> </td>
<td width="62"><center><font size="2" color="#000000">Solaris
2.6</font></center> </td>
<td width="62"><center><font size="2" color="#000000">AIX
4.3</font></center> </td>
<td width="62"><center><font size="2" color="#000000">Irix
6.4</font></center> </td>
<td width="62"><center><font size="2" color="#000000">Digital
UNIX 4.0d</font></center> </td>
<td width="62"><center><font size="2" color="#000000">NTS
4.0/EE</font></center> </td>
</tr>
<tr><td width="226"><b><font size="2" color="#000000">Extension</font></b>
</td>
<td width="62"></td>
<td width="62"></td>
<td width="62"></td>
<td width="62"> </td>
<td width="62"></td>
<td width="62"></td>
</tr>
<tr><td width="226"><i><font size="2" color="#000000">IPSec</font></i>
</td>
<td width="62"><center>Yes</center></td>
<td width="62"><center><font size="2" color="#000000">No</font></center>
</td>
<td width="62"><center>Yes</center></td>
<td width="62"><center><font size="2" color="#000000">No</font></center>
</td>
<td width="62"><center>Yes</center></td>
<td width="62"><center><font size="2" color="#000000">No</font></center>
</td>
</tr>
<tr><td width="226"><i><font size="2" color="#000000">IPv6</font></i>
</td>
<td width="62"><center>Yes</center></td>
<td width="62"><center>Yes</center> </td>
<td width="62"><center>Yes</center></td>
<td width="62"><center><font size="2" color="#000000">No</font></center>
</td>
<td width="62"><center>Yes</center></td>
<td width="62"><center><font size="2" color="#000000">No</font></center>
</td>
</tr>
<tr><td width="226"><i><font size="2" color="#000000">RSVP</font></i>
</td>
<td width="62"><center>Yes</center></td>
<td width="62"><center><font size="2" color="#000000">Partial</font></center>
</td>
<td width="62"><center>Yes</center></td>
<td width="62"><center>Yes</center> </td>
<td width="62"><center>Yes</center></td>
<td width="62"><center><font size="2" color="#000000">No</font></center>
</td>
</tr>
<tr><td width="226"><i><font size="2" color="#000000">IP
Multiplexing</font></i> </td>
<td width="62"><center>Yes</center></td>
<td width="62"><center>Yes</center> </td>
<td width="62"><center>Yes</center></td>
<td width="62"><center><font size="2" color="#000000">No</font></center>
</td>
<td width="62"><center><font size="2" color="#000000">No</font></center>
</td>
<td width="62"><center><font size="2" color="#000000">No</font></center>
</td>
</tr>
<tr><td width="226"><i><font size="2" color="#000000">IP
Multicast</font></i> </td>
<td width="62"><center>Yes</center></td>
<td width="62"><center>Yes</center> </td>
<td width="62"><center>Yes</center></td>
<td width="62"><center>Yes</center> </td>
<td width="62"><center>Yes</center></td>
<td width="62"><center>Partial</center> </td>
</tr>
<tr><td width="226"><b><font size="2" color="#000000">Performance
Optimizations</font></b> </td>
<td width="62"></td>
<td width="62"></td>
<td width="62"></td>
<td width="62"> </td>
<td width="62"></td>
<td width="62"></td>
</tr>
<tr><td width="226"><i><font size="2" color="#000000">Telnet
in kernel</font></i> </td>
<td width="62"><center><font size="2" color="#000000">No</font></center>
</td>
<td width="62"><center>Yes</center></td>
<td width="62"><center>Yes</center> </td>
<td width="62"><center><font size="2" color="#000000">No</font></center>
</td>
<td width="62"><center><font size="2" color="#000000">No</font></center>
</td>
<td width="62"><center><font size="2" color="#000000">No</font></center>
</td>
</tr>
<tr><td width="226"><i><font size="2" color="#000000">Kernel
Sockets</font></i> </td>
<td width="62"><center><font size="2" color="#000000">No</font></center>
</td>
<td width="62"><center>Yes</center></td>
<td width="62"><center>Yes</center> </td>
<td width="62"><center>Yes</center></td>
<td width="62"><center>Yes</center> </td>
<td width="62"><center><font size="2" color="#000000">No</font></center>
</td>
</tr>
<tr><td width="226"><i><font size="2" color="#000000">TCP
Large Windows</font></i> </td>
<td width="62"><center><font size="2" color="#000000">No</font></center>
</td>
<td width="62"><center>Yes</center></td>
<td width="62"><center>Yes</center> </td>
<td width="62"><center>Yes</center></td>
<td width="62"><center>Yes</center> </td>
<td width="62"><center><font size="2" color="#000000">No</font></center>
</td>
</tr>
<tr><td width="226"><i><font size="2" color="#000000">Zero
Copy TCP/Hardware Checksum</font></i> </td>
<td width="62"><center><font size="2" color="#000000">No</font></center>
</td>
<td width="62"><center>Yes</center></td>
<td width="62"><center><font size="2" color="#000000">No</font></center>
</td>
<td width="62"><center>Yes</center></td>
<td width="62"><center><font size="2" color="#000000">No</font></center>
</td>
<td width="62"><center><font size="2" color="#000000">No</font></center>
</td>
</tr>
<tr><td width="226"><i><font size="2" color="#000000">Path
MTU Discovery</font></i> </td>
<td width="62"><center><font size="2" color="#000000">No</font></center>
</td>
<td width="62"><center><font size="2" color="#000000">No</font></center>
</td>
<td width="62"><center>Yes</center></td>
<td width="62"><center>Yes</center> </td>
<td width="62"><center>Yes</center></td>
<td width="62"><center><font size="2" color="#000000">No</font></center>
</td>
</tr>
<tr><td width="226"><i><font size="2" color="#000000">OpenShortestPathFirst
(OSPF)</font></i> </td>
<td width="62"><center>Yes</center></td>
<td width="62"><center><font size="2" color="#000000">No</font></center>
</td>
<td width="62"><center>Yes</center></td>
<td width="62"><center><font size="2" color="#000000">No</font></center>
</td>
<td width="62"><center>Yes</center></td>
<td width="62"><center>Yes</center> </td>
</tr>
<tr><td width="226"><i><font size="2" color="#000000">RTP:
Real Time Protocol</font></i> </td>
<td width="62"><center><font size="2" color="#000000">No</font></center>
</td>
<td width="62"><center><font size="2" color="#000000">No</font></center>
</td>
<td width="62"><center>Yes</center></td>
<td width="62"><center>Yes</center> </td>
<td width="62"><center><font size="2" color="#000000">No</font></center>
</td>
<td width="62"><center><font size="2" color="#000000">No</font></center>
</td>
</tr>
<tr><td width="226"><i><font size="2" color="#000000">RTCP:
Real Time Control Protocol</font></i> </td>
<td width="62"><center><font size="2" color="#000000">No</font></center>
</td>
<td width="62"><center><font size="2" color="#000000">No</font></center>
</td>
<td width="62"><center>Yes</center></td>
<td width="62"><center>Yes</center> </td>
<td width="62"><center><font size="2" color="#000000">No</font></center>
</td>
<td width="62"><center><font size="2" color="#000000">No</font></center>
</td>
</tr>
<tr><td width="226"><i><font size="2" color="#000000">Parallelized
TCP/IP</font></i> </td>
<td width="62"><center><font size="2" color="#000000">Yes</font></center>
</td>
<td width="62"><center><font size="2" color="#000000">Yes</font></center>
</td>
<td width="62"><center>Yes</center></td>
<td width="62"><center>Yes</center> </td>
<td width="62"><center>Yes</center></td>
<td width="62"><center><font size="2" color="#000000">No</font></center>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
</p><p>
</p><h3><a name="graphs">INTERNET/INTRANET NETWORKING FEATURES</a></h3>
<p><img src="./Microsoft Windows NT Server 4.0 versus UNIX_files/AIX43_f.gif" alt="Networking Features Graph">
</p><h3>RELIABILITY AND SCALABILITY</h3>
<p><img src="./Microsoft Windows NT Server 4.0 versus UNIX_files/AIX43_h.gif" alt="Reliability and Scalability Graph">
</p><h3>SYSTEM MANAGEMENT</h3>
<p><img src="./Microsoft Windows NT Server 4.0 versus UNIX_files/AIX43_j.gif" alt="System Management Graph">
</p><p>Copyright Digital Equipment Corporation 1995-1998. All Rights Reserved.
</p><p>
<table width="85%" cellspacing="0">
<tbody><tr>
<td>
<p>See also D. H. Brown's
<b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.dhbrown.com/pdfs/osscorecard.html">
Operating System Scorecard page</a></b> for other graphical comparisons
of the operating systems compared above.
</p><hr>
<h3><a name="reliability">Reliability</a></h3>
<p>In today's world, reliability is often more important than speed.
Although performance is largely a function of hardware platform (see
the next section), it is in the area of <i>reliability</i> that the
choice of operating systems has the most influence. Even if one
operating system offers more functionality, is more scalable, and
offers greater ease of system management, what good are these
advantages when a server processing real-time financial transactions is
plagued by frequent crashes resulting in unacceptable downtimes? The
analogy of a fast, economical automobile with lots of gadgets, and
sporty appearance that frequently stalls in traffic despite repeated
visits to the authorized service center is actually quite
representative of Windows NT.
</p><p>
<a name="stability">One often hears about Windows NT Server</a>
being referred to as a "stable" operating system, but this is not
entirely accurate. Were it so, then we wouldn't be reading articles
like <b>
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.zdnet.com/pccomp/features/fea0797/nt/sub5.html">
NT Lies: Lie 5 - NT is robust and crash-proof</a></b>, <b>
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.gcn.com/gcn/1998/July13/cov2.htm">
Software glitches leave Navy Smart Ship dead in the water</a></b>
(Gregory Slabodkin, <a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.gcn.com/">
Government Computer News</a>, 7-13-98),
<b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.zdnet.com/pcweek/opinion/0330/30coff.html">
Corporate IT needs an engine that never quits</a></b> (Peter Coffee, PC Week 3-30-98) or <b>
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.zdnet.com/pcweek/opinion/0413/13coff.html">
We do not have a failure to communicate</a></b> (Peter Coffee, PC Week
04-13-98).
When the author of these last two articles posed the question,
"What do you use when failure is not an option?" he was bombarded by
"three times the usual number of vigorous e-mail replies." Concerning
these replies he states:
</p><blockquote>
"Notably, I did not get a single message from anyone who took the
position that Windows NT was good enough. Quite the opposite: Several
messages expressed a resigned expectation that Windows NT 5.0 would
stagger out the door, burdened with immature add-on services but
without achieving corporate-class reliability in its basic functions.
<p>"I heard from one reader who said that at his site, Linux on a 486
is outperforming Windows NT on a 200MHz Pentium, and he has Linux
machines that have been running without interruption since before
Windows NT 4.0 was released.
</p><p>"I also heard from enterprise-class sites where Linux is considered
a proven choice, with source-code accessibility outweighing the dubious
advantage of more traditional vendor support. What others promise
someday, Linux gives many users now--at a bargain price.
</p><p>-- Peter Coffee,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.zdnet.com/pcweek/opinion/0413/13coff.html">
We do not have a failure to communicate</a>,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.zdnet.com/pcweek/">
PC Week</a>, 4-13-98.
</p></blockquote>
<a name="ms-summit">Indeed,</a> Windows NT is a great improvement over Windows 3.1 or Windows
95, but it still has a long way to go before it can reach the level of
stability offered by even the
<b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.opensource.org/">
Open Source</a></b> (free) UNIX operating systems. When
pitted against Sun Microsystems's Solaris, there's really no comparison
at all. At the recent Microsoft Global Summit,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.crn.com/">Computer Reseller News</a> journalists
Barbara Darrow and Stuart Glascock interviewed some of the attendees:
<blockquote>
"We have a
Solaris box that hasn't been rebooted in two years," said
James Domengeaux, president of Comspace.Com, a
Houston-based Web reseller. In comparison, NT servers
are rebooted often, he said. "That's a problem especially in
e-commerce if you're talking transactions per second,
because how many orders do you miss?" he said.
<p>-- Barbara Darrow and Stuart Glascock,
<b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.techweb.com/wire/story/TWB19980728S0004">
Microsoft Admits NT Trails Solaris</a></b>,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.crn.com/">Computer Reseller News</a>,
28 July 1998.
</p></blockquote>
<p>Windows NT's lack of stability is a known issue yet managers tend to
deal with it in discrete ways, reports one IT professional:
</p><blockquote>
"'I know three companies that are silently putting more and more into
UNIX . . . at the expense of NT, simply because NT falls over too
often,' says Peter Flynn, a consultant in Cork, Ireland. NT is known to
crash too frequently for many IT manager's tastes. Typical causes are
memory access violations and I/O errors.
<p>"These companies aren't inclined to talk about their decisions
'because of pressure from upstairs,' Flynn says. 'The
buy-Microsoft-only ethos has taken over from the buy-IBM-only, and
managers who decided [against advice from technology people] to use NT
rather than UNIX are now unwilling to lose face,' he adds.
</p><p>-- Mark Gibbs,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.nwfusion.com/intranet/0330linux.html">
Lookin' into Linux</a>,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.nwfusion.com/">Network World</a>, March 30, 1998.
</p></blockquote>
<p>Any IS professional who has worked in a Windows NT environment has
intimate knowledge of the infamous "Blue Screen of Death," a situation
in which the normal desktop windowing system disappears completely and
is replaced by a full screen of hexadecimal numbers on a blue
background. The <i>only</i> method of recovery in this situation is
powering the machine off and rebooting. What causes "blue screens" in
NT varies. In my own experience, the following can induce this state
of failure:
</p><ul>
<li>When both IPX/SPX and TCP/IP protocols are used and technicians put
a machine with a static IP address on a different subnet;
</li><li>When some 16-bit Visual Basic applications are <i>not</i> being run
in "separate memory space." NT does not run them in separate memory
space by default. This is a <i>manual</i> configuration which should
be set for each and every 16-bit application on the machine;
</li><li>Certain brands of memory modules or cache will induce this, even
though the same hardware runs fine under other operating systems, such
as Windows 95.
</li></ul>
<p>In some situations, Linux too will complain about its hardware. I
personally have not experienced this despite having installed Linux on
a wide variety of hardware, but it may happen. It appears to happen
mainly when one is compiling the kernel on a machine with bad memory.
For more information see
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.bitwizard.nl/sig11/">Signal 11</a>.
The above list is by no means complete. As a matter of fact, Tim
Newsham, a software developer for both Windows and UNIX platforms,
found this short list very misleading:
</p><blockquote>
In the BSOD section you mention a few ways that a BSOD can be caused.
I think this (small) list is misleading to the reader. There are
<i>so</i> many ways that an NT system can crash, that by listing a
small number you are likely to give the wrong impression. More
dangerous yet is the fact that your cases mostly involve a person who
is on the console doing something BAD to cause a crash. Many of the
ways to crash an NT system happen inadvertently in the day-to-day
operation of the system (indeed, leaving the system on too long while
running a myriad of applications can cause bizarre crashes with little
clue to their cause). Additionally malicious users can trigger crashes
due to shoddy implementation in software modules such as the login
program (LSA) or the tcp/ip stack.
</blockquote>
The "Blue Screen of Death" can be commonplace in some computing
environments and is often difficult to troubleshoot due to the either
cryptic or non-existent error reporting. In addition to this, NT is
particularly prone to virus attacks on the Intel-based hardware. For
operating systems on Intel hardware that must be booted from a hard
drive, i.e. NT Server, the Master Boot Record of a hard drive can be
the death of the operating system. Linux, along with several other
UNIX operating systems that run on Intel-based hardware, can load a
compressed kernel from a boot floppy, thus avoiding this problem. What
this means is, an NT Server can theoretically be crashed by a virus
written 10 years ago for MS-DOS computers. Anyone planning to deploy
an NT Server in a mission critical environment should consider this
fact. I personally have encountered MBR viruses in a corporate
environment running Windows NT 4.0 (no Windows 95 clients!), and their
effects are devastating. In addition to this, most viruses that would
incapacitate a Windows operating system don't have an effect on UNIX
operating systems since they often require the MS Windows environment
to do their damage.
<p>One real-life situation involving NT's reliability is reported by
the University of Nebraska Press's Information Systems Department
manager, Quinn P. Coldiron, who writes,
</p><blockquote>
Life after moving Cats [an order fulfillment and inventory system] to
NT was a nightmare. The system was crashing two to three times a day
with no reason that I could find. I was on the phone with Microsoft and
Cats constantly, but nobody could figure it out. Microsoft had me apply
Service Packs one through three and a few HotFixes, which helped, but
it still was crashing at least twice a week with the infamous "Blue
Screen of Death". After many weeks and about $1500.00 in phone support
from Microsoft, the technical support rep told me that I should find a
better software package than The Cat's Pajamas. This was not the
solution I was looking for, since this is the package that a sizeable
percentage of presses our size nationwide are running, so I was forced
to bring the old Novell server back into production until I could
figure something out. . . . Fourteen months later, we are running Linux
as our server.
</blockquote>
<p>The UNIX equivalent of the "Blue Screen of Death" would be called
"kernel panic." It obviously exists, since I have heard and read about
it, but I've never been witness to it in my professional career.
Although I am sure that UNIX servers do crash on occasion, these are
extremely rare events. If and when a UNIX server crashes, it is almost
always due to a hardware failure of some sort. Any software induced
problems in a UNIX environment generally make themselves known over a
period of time, sometimes in the form of overall gradual performance
degradation of the system, giving the administrator ample time to track
down the source of the problem, correct it, and stop/restart the
<i>process</i> (very rarely the entire machine!) causing the problem.
In general, a UNIX server is halted only in the following situations:
</p><ul>
<li>Due to a hardware failure, for instance, a hard drive fails;
</li><li>A hardware upgrade needs to be performed;
</li><li>A lengthy power outage has occurred and the backup power supply
resources have been exhausted;
</li><li>The kernel is being upgraded.
</li><li>A beta kernel is being tested (not recommended for production
environments).
</li></ul>
If none of the above the above occurs, then a UNIX system's uptime can
be measured in years. NT, however, cannot boast of such periods of
uninterrupted service. Even if one could eliminate the "Blue Screen of
Death," NT is hampered by its own design and use of
difficult-to-recreate proprietary binary configuration files, for
instance, the NT registry. Read about a
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.unix-vs-nt.org/kirch/massive-nt-failure.html">
massive NT failure</a> that
lead to over 10,000 NT machines being rendered useless for any task
requiring network resources.
<hr>
<h3><a name="management">System Management</a></h3>
<p>The argument that Windows NT is easier to manage due to its GUI
(point-and-click graphical user interface) is unfounded. The
advantage, if any, of GUI over CLI (command line interface, i.e. having
manually to type commands from a keyboard) is questionable. The first
assumption is that Windows NT has an advantage over UNIX because of its
GUI. This is wrong. UNIX operating systems have a GUI as well (see
this
<b>
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://citv.unl.edu/linux/LinuxPresentation.html#Ease of administration">graphic example</a></b>).
</p><blockquote>
"NT has long enjoyed an intuitive user interface for managing single
systems, largely benefiting from the exceptional familiarity of the
Windows look-and-feel adopted by the NT GUI. However, as users begin to
deploy large numbers of servers, and geographically-dispersed servers,
some of NT's architectural shortcomings for system management have
become more apparent, deriving primarily from its design as a
single-user system. The multi-user design of UNIX supports remote
access at multiple levels, including the ability to login with a
character session, via telnet, to edit configuration files, running GUI
tools over the network-enabled X Window System, and now through Java
versions of system management tools. NT currently enjoys none of these
features. Rather, remote NT management typically involves either
installing a local expert which Microsoft hopes will be easier due to
NT's larger volumes and similarity to mainstream Windows versions or
relying on layered system management products from Microsoft or third
parties. Neither option, though, quite matches the efficiency of
managing distributed UNIX systems."<br>
-- Quoted from:
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.unix.digital.com/unix/v4/dhbrown/AIX43.htm">
An In-Depth Analysis of Five Commercial UNIX Operating Systems and
Windows NT Server 4.0 (Enterprise Edition) by D.H. Brown Associates,
Inc.</a>
</blockquote>
<p>See also: <b>
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.zdnet.com/pccomp/features/fea0797/nt/sub9.html">
NT Lies: Lie 9 - Zero administration is here.</a></b>
</p><hr>
<h3><a name="performance">Performance</a></h3>
<p>Processing power is largely a function of computer hardware rather
than of operating system. Since most commercial UNIX operating systems
run only on high-end workstations or servers, it would be ridiculous to
compare an
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.rs6000.ibm.com/hardware/largescale/index.html">
IBM SP2</a>,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.sun.com/servers/ultra_enterprise/10000/spec.html">
Sun Enterprise 10000</a>, or a
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.sun.com/servers/enterprise/450/;$sessionid$DSWFMQYAABX5HAMW0JZE45UBS1JHEUDO">
Sun Enterprise 450</a>
to anything Compaq or Dell produces. UNIX has
been historically an operating system for high-end hardware. To say
that UNIX outperforms NT based on the results of differing hardware
would be unfair to Microsoft. On the other hand, Microsoft has
reduced, rather than increased, the number of hardware architectures it
supports. NT for MIPS has been discontinued due to lack of customers
and PowerPC support is only marginal. NT, now reduced to only x86 and
Alpha architectures will remain "a poor man's server" as it is commonly
referred to in the IT business.
</p><p>NT's lack of reliability is only surpassed by its lack of
scalability. The superior scalability achieved by the commercial UNIX
operating systems on their respective hardware is the reason why large
corporations with high capacity computing needs cannot switch to NT
even if they wanted to. Mary Hubley, Research Director with the <b>
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.gartner.com/">GartnerGroup</a></b>, mentions in her article <b>
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.gartner.com/public/static/datapro/industry/indnews6.html">
NT and UNIX: Irresistible Force vs. Immovable Object</a></b> (January
1998) that the public's overly positive perception of NT's
capabilities is based mainly on marketing hype:
</p><blockquote>
"Many people believe that NT is easier to use than it actually is,
scales better than it does, and is powerful enough to do what UNIX can
do. But most of this perception is due to great marketing by Microsoft,
and is not reality.
</blockquote>
If high performance Windows file sharing is of utmost importance,
then one should consider choosing a server configuration that has
broken the world speed record for such services, an SGI machine
running IRIX:
<blockquote>
"Samba 2.0 has been benchmarked using the Ziff-Davis NetBench (R)
benchmarking suite, as the world's fastest Windows server, achieving
193 megabits per second file serving performance on a Silicon Graphics
(R) Origin 200 (R) server with 60 Windows clients."
<p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://lwn.net/1999/0121/samba.html">
Samba Team Releases Samba 2.0:
World's Fastest Windows Server Software</a></b> as
sent out on Sat, 16 Jan 1999 16:08:38 +1100 to recipients on the
Samba Announcement Mailing List (samba-announce@samba.org) with
the HTML version hosted courtesy of
<b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://lwn.net/">Linux Weekly News</a></b>.
</p></blockquote>
This announcement also reveals one <i>very</i> important fact regarding
the interoperability with Windows NT domains:
<blockquote>
"Samba 2.0 features the first non-Microsoft implementation of the
Windows NT Domain authentication protocols, allowing a Samba 2.0
server to be seamlessly integrated into an existing Windows NT Domain."
</blockquote>
<p>For even more information, try visiting one of the many
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://samba.org/">Samba Web sites</a> located in 20
different countries.
</p><p>Ann Harrison's article provides an excellent testimonial from
Southwestern Bell regarding how Linux outperforms NT:
</p><blockquote>
"Randy Kessell, manager of technical analysis for a Southwestern Bell
operation center, . . .
adds that his company is thinking about replacing
their NT network server
with Linux. 'Our preliminary tests show that the Linux solution is
outrunning the NT solution,'
says Kessell. 'It's much faster.'
<p>-- Ann Harrison,
<b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.softwaremag.com/Sept98/sm098cv.htm">
In LINUX We . . .</a></b>,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.softwaremagazine.com/">
Software Magazine</a>, Cover Story, September 1998.
</p></blockquote>
<p><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.ugraf.com/">European MikroGraf Corporation</a>
has published the results of their own
<b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.ugraf.com/unix-nt/jt/unix-nt.nob.html">UNIX vs
NT</a></b> performance comparison and explains why:
</p><blockquote>
"Several times a month, customers in the printing and prepress industry
ask us what server platform they should use: Unix or
Windows NT. Windows NT might be acceptable for day-to-day operations in
the average business, but does not handle the loads that
publishers typically put on servers.
</blockquote>
<p>The interesting thing about MikroGraf's
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.ugraf.com/unix-nt/jt/unix-nt.nob.html">
UNIX vs NT comparison</a> is that the same hardware was used in two of
the four tests, a Digital Model 2100: once with Digital UNIX as the
operating system, and again with Windows NT on the same hardware.
</p><p>To be fair, one should compare NT Server's performance to that of
Linux or FreeBSD, since all three operating systems run on the same
hardware, Intel, the hardware-type most often used with NT.
Unfortunately, a truly objective analysis of performance would have to
based on benchmarks, but these are not plentiful and usually only focus
on specific areas like Web performance:
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.calderasystems.com/news/features/971222.keylabs.html">
Caldera OpenLinux vs. Windows NT: WebBench Performance Test</a>. The
general consensus among IT professionals is, however, that Linux and
FreeBSD greatly outperform NT. Considering that these UNIX kernels are
custom-compiled to contain only the software actually required by the
administrator, Linux and FreeBSD can function more efficiently than NT.
Inherently, any operating system requiring fewer resources will
outperform a more <i>bloated</i> operating system like NT. UNIX does
not require a graphical user interface to function. NT does. Anyone
knows that graphics require incredible amounts of disk space and
memory. The same holds true for sound files, which seem to be so
important to the Microsoft operating systems.
</p><p>Benchmarks performed on similar UNIX operating systems using the
same hardware are more meaningful.
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.tdl.com/~netex/mb/mb.html">Net Express</a>, an
Internet retailer of x86-based hardware, whose systems are "designed
for scientists, engineers and the telecommunications industry," shows
what results can be achieved with the proper operating system:
</p><blockquote>
<hr>
<h4><font size="-1">Byte UNIX Benchmark 3.2 for OS Comparison:</font></h4>
<p><font size="-1">In addition we are presenting these Byte UNIX
Benchmark 3.2 results for comparing the relative speeds of three
popular UNIX/UNIX-Clone OS's. Tests were conducted on Pentium 133MHz
machines with 32MB's of RAM, the Triton-II 430HX chip set and a
BusLogic SCSI controller: </font><br>
</p></blockquote>
</td></tr></tbody></table>
<table border="1">
<tbody><tr>
<th align="left" bgcolor="#0000FF"><b><font color="#FFFFFF">System</font></b></th>
<th bgcolor="#0000FF"><b><font color="#FFFFFF">Bytemarks</font></b></th>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><font size="-1">Linux on a Pentium 133MHz </font></td>
<td align="center"><font size="-1">12.2</font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><font size="-1">BSD on a Pentium 133MHz </font></td>
<td align="center"><font size="-1">9.8</font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><font size="-1">Solaris 2.5 on a Pentium 133MHz </font></td>
<td align="center"><font size="-1">6.2</font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><font size="-1">Solaris on a Sun Sparc-II Ultra 167MHz System </font></td>
<td align="center"><font size="-1">13.7</font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><font size="-1">Solaris 2.5 on an Orion Pentium Pro 200MHz </font></td>
<td align="center"><font size="-1">13.5</font></td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
<table width="85%" cellspacing="0">
<tbody><tr>
<td>
<blockquote>
<p><font size="-1">From these results we can see that Linux is a very efficient
OS. Scores for Linux on the Pentium 133 were nearly as fast as Solaris
2.5 on a 167MHz Sparc Ultra or a 200MHz Pentium Pro!!!</font></p>
<center><p><i><font size="-1">Copyright © 1996 Net Express All Rights
Reserved. </font></i></p></center>
<hr>
</blockquote>
<p><a name="KickAss">Perhaps</a> an example of the performance
advantage one could expect to find when choosing a UNIX operating
system coupled with the
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.opensource.org/">Open Source</a> (free)
Apache Web Server can be found in an
article by Sean Fulton that appeared in INTERNETWEEK on May 5, 1997,
<b>
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.techweb.com/se/directlink.cgi?CWK19970505S0103">
Towers of Power -- We test five muscular Web servers aimed at high-end
intranet applications</a></b>. For NT, the test results were pretty
devastating:
</p><blockquote>
"Telenet System Solutions produced the most surprises during our tests,
with a BSDi-powered, single-CPU system that kept up with-and in some
cases outperformed-twin-CPU machines running Windows NT.
<p>"The differentiating factor here was the BSDi 3.0 OS loaded on the
machine and its Apache HTTP server software. All of the twin-CPU
machines were running Windows NT 4.0 with Microsoft's Internet
Information Server 2.0.
</p></blockquote>
<p>While on the subject of Web Server performance, IBM has regained the
title of fastest Web server with the introduction of its new 262 MHz
PowerPC RS64-II microprocessor:
</p><blockquote>
"The new processor will also make IBM's S70 one of the fastest Web
servers on the market when used in certain configurations, according
to a certain benchmark test selected by IBM. In a 12-way configuration,
the S70 delivered SPECweb96 performance of 9,081 HTTP operations per
second, making it the first system to break the 9,000 barrier,
according to IBM.
<p>-- James Niccolai,
<b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.infoworld.com/cgi-bin/displayStory.pl?980812.ecrs6000.htm">
New chip to debut in IBM's RS/6000 Model S70</a></b>,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.infoworld.com/">
InfoWorld Electric</a>, 12 August 1998.
</p></blockquote>
<p>For enterprise-level processing power, clustering wth Linux can
produce awesome results at a modest price. In a recent report by
Michael Stutz, NASA's Beowulf project sets an example for the
the potential of such <a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.opensource.org/">Open Source</a>
UNIX operating systems like Linux in the area of supercomputing:
</p><blockquote>
"Enter <a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.beowulf.org/">Beowulf</a>,
a system that uses a parallel-processing
architecture and off-the-shelf machines running the freely
available Linux operating system. One machine is the server
node, and distributes a processing job to all of the other
machines, which are client nodes.
<p>
"The total hardware cost for CCD's 24-node Beowulf cluster
was US$57,000 -- as compared to most commercial
supercomputers today, which cost between $10 million and
$30 million. The cluster gives 2.4 gigabytes per second
throughput, which means that a 200 GB hard drive can be
scanned in only 20 seconds. While it took five to seven
weeks to analyze the evidence of several intruders in the
recent Israeli hacker case, Talleur said it would have only
taken a few hours with Beowulf.
</p><p>
"The Beowulf project was developed at NASA by Thomas
Sterling and Donald Becker in the summer of 1994; today,
anyone can buy a Beowulf CD-ROM -- Red Hat
Software's
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.redhat.com/product.phtml/EX1000/">Extreme Linux</a>
package -- for $29.
</p><p>
-- Michael Stutz,
<b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.wired.com/news/news/technology/story/14450.html">
NASA Greets Beowulf</a></b>,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.wired.com/news/">Wired News</a>,
17 August 1998.
</p></blockquote>
<hr>
<h3><a name="security">Security</a></h3>
<p>This topic is too vast and complex to be fully addressed in an
article of this scope. Security is, however, very important.
The following links are excellent starting points for comparing the
security weaknesses of the various operating systems:
</p><ul>
<li><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.infoworld.com/cgi-bin/displayNew.pl?/petrel/980713np.htm">
Probing into C2 security claims: Is NT as secure as Microsoft has said it is?</a><br>
</li><li><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.zdnet.com/pccomp/features/fea0797/nt/sub2.html">
NT Lies: Lie 2 - NT is less secure than UNIX</a><br>
(Real security means taking a server off the network and locking it up!)
</li><li><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.zdnet.com/pccomp/features/fea0797/nt/sub4.html">
NT Lies: Lie 4 - NT Meets Military Standards</a>
</li><li><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.byte.com/art/9711/sec6/art3.htm">
A BYTE article on Windows NT security problems</a>
</li><li><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.iss.net/vd/bill_stout/NThacks/ntfsdos.htm">
NT secured filesystem (NTFS) can be read from Linux, bypassing filesystem security.</a>
</li><li><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.iss.net/vd/bill_stout/ntexploits.htm">
Known NT Exploits</a>
</li><li><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.it.kth.se/~rom/ntsec.html">
NT Security - Frequently Asked Questions version 0.41</a>
</li><li><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://afcert.csap.af.mil/vulnerabilities.html">
AFCERT - Security Issues for various operating systems</a>
</li></ul>
<hr>
<h2><a name="misconceptions">Some Common Misconceptions</a></h2>
<p><b>NT is a toy operating system</b>
</p><p>For an operating system that <i>has</i> evolved from a toy operating
system, it offers some professional functionality. Although it does
not scale very well -- performance goes down with more than 4 CPUs per
server -- it has come a long way. Although I would not recommend it as
the primary operating system in an enterprise environment, it should
yield satisfactory performance for small businesses with fewer than 250
user accounts that do not run mission critical processes. Please keep
in mind, however, that a single NT server will not be sufficient to
service 250 users. The general recommendation is one PDC (Windows NT
Primary Domain Controller) and two BDCs (Backup Domain Controllers).
Having other server applications on the PDC is also not recommended.
Should RDBMS, E-mail, Web, and other typical services be required,
three NT servers will most likely prove to be insufficient.
</p><p><b>By converting everything to Windows NT a company can eliminate
the problems of a heterogeneous networking environment.</b>
</p><p>The first assumption here is that a heterogeneous networking
environment is a problem. I once worked at a company where NT and
Novell coexisted with very little conflict. As a matter of fact, the
very reason for this coexistence was because Novell outperformed NT in
the area of file and printer sharing services. With UNIX, one can
create Microsoft-compatible file and printer sharing without the users
ever knowing that these services emanate from a UNIX server. For all
they know, it's an NT server. This functionality is provided for in
Sun's UNIX operating system, Solaris. Linux can use a software package
called <b>
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://samba.anu.edu.au/samba/">
Samba</a></b> that ships with most distributions to achieve this. Samba
is available for practically all UNIX operating systems. It has also
been ported to VMS, MVS, OS/2, Stratus-VOS, Amiga, Novell, and MPE/iX.
</p><p><b><a name="gui">UNIX is this outdated, cryptic, command-line based
operating system.</a></b>
</p><p>Wrong! CDE (Common Desktop Environment) is a GUI desktop (Graphical
User Interface: you use a mouse to point and click, or drag and drop on
a colorful "desktop"; this is the basis for Microsoft's success.). CDE
ships with most commercial UNIX operating systems: Sun's <b>
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.sun.com/solaris/">Solaris</a></b>,
IBM's <b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.rs6000.ibm.com/software/OS/aix43.html">
AIX</a></b>
Hewlett Packard's <b>
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://software.external.hp.com/OS_transition/WHYTRANS.HTM">
HP-UX</a></b>,
DEC's <b>
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.unix.digital.com/">Digital UNIX</a></b>, to name a
few. For around $90 you can get CDE for Linux if you happen to be
dissatisfied with your choice of <b>four GUI systems</b> that ship with
Linux: OpenLook, the GUI that Solaris used to use; FVWM, an
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.opensource.org/">Open Source</a> (free) GUI
that has many similarities to the Windows 3.1 GUI; or FVWM-95, another
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.opensource.org/">Open Source</a>
GUI that mimics the Windows 95 GUI (when looking at a single
window, one can't distinguish between FVWM-95 and Windows 95). TWM is
the predecessor of the various FVWM window managers which also ships
with Linux. If you've never had the opportunity to sit at a computer
running UNIX, here are some <b><font color="RED">SCREENSHOTS</font></b>
of these window managers:
<b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://e.themes.org/sqlgal.cgi?version=DR0.15">
Enlightenment</a></b>,
<b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.plig.org/xwinman/screenshots/dtwm.gif">
CDE</a></b>,
<b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.unix-vs-nt.org/images/ted.jpg">
TED</a></b> (TriTeal's CDE for Linux),
<b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.kde.org/kscreenshots.html">
KDE</a></b>,
<b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.plig.org/xwinman/screenshots/fvwm-wlug.jpg">
FVWM 1.24</a></b>,
<b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.plig.org/xwinman/screenshots/fvwm-geir.gif">
FVWM 2.x</a></b>, <b>
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.terraware.net/ftp/pub/Mirrors/FVWM95/screenshot-full.gif">
FVWM-95</a></b>, <b>
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://cslib.ecs.soton.ac.uk/wm/gfx/orig-olvwm.jpg">
olvwm</a></b>(OpenLook Virtual Window Manger). These are only some of
the GUI interfaces available to UNIX users. Matt Chapman's
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.plig.org/xwinman/">Guide to Window Managers for The
X Window System</a> is an excellent resource on this topic. You will
find many more screenshots on his site than I am able to list here.
Keep in mind that almost all of these window managers are highly
configurable; you shouldn't be surprised to see screenshots made of the
same window manager which look completely different. As Matt states on
his page, "Let's face it, people are different, and those that use
computers use them in different ways for different tasks. So why do
some think we should all use (suffer?) the same interface?"
Ironically, it is Microsoft's graphical user interface that is lacking
the features of customization.
</p><p>As for the claim that UNIX is behind the times, it is still the
operating system of choice for science, engineering, research, and
higher education. Most engineers would choose UNIX over NT without
hesitation. They are fully aware of its ability to be customized and
its tuning capabilities for the optimization of specialized computing
tasks. Readers' feedback to
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.isdmag.com/">isd</a> confirm this attitude:
</p><blockquote>
"As we suspected, most designers are adamant: They want their EDA tools
to run under Unix. What's more, they say that Linux is
technically excellent by every measure, and NT simply isn't. Painfully
aware that technical excellence doesn't guarantee market
share, many readers say that this time it should.
<p>
"Although readers' sentiments overwhelmingly backed Linux, we were
impressed with the quality of the input . . . ."
</p><p>
<b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.isdmag.com/Editorial/1998/CoverStory9807.html">
Engineers Speak Out: Linux vs. Windows NT, Part 1</a></b><br>
-- Murry Shohat, <a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.isdmag.com/">
<i>Intergrated System Design</i> Magazine</a>, July 1998.
</p></blockquote>
<p><b>Everyone is converting to NT anyway, we might as well gradually
replace our UNIX servers with NT servers. It's the way of the
future.</b>
</p><p>If you talk to MIS managers of some large corporations who had UNIX
and Novell two years ago, and then replaced their Novell servers with
NT servers, you'll find that none of them can manage without their UNIX
servers. It seems that heavy processing is still better accomplished
with UNIX servers. So far in my career, every Oracle server I've ever
seen was running on a UNIX server. One IT professional, however, did
send me e-mail saying, "I support several installations of ORACLE on
NT. There are performance and functional issues that I encounter which
I have never seen on UNIX (Pyramid)."
</p><hr>
<h2><a name="views">Views of Other MIS Professionals</a></h2>
<p><b>Robert Schindler, a mechanical engineer based in Florida who has
been working for the past decade as a free-lance consultant for various
Fortune 100 companies in the field of structural analysis, writes:</b>
</p><blockquote>
"It will be a long time before you hear me praise NT or any other MS
product. I believe that Gates and his empire have done more to lower
the standards of our society than anything else in my lifetime. If my
product had the same quality as theirs, airplanes would be falling out
of the sky hourly.
</blockquote>
<p><b>One professional who wishes to remain anonymous for fear of losing his job writes:</b>
</p><blockquote>
"At my day job I work at a big firm. It's one of the biggest of its
kind in the world. We decided to go with a Network Monitoring and
Management package from Cabletron. It's available on both NT and Unix.
The people who would run it gave them a blank check for the system to
be set up under NT because they were more familiar with NT than they
were with Unix. About a year and a quarter million
dollars later, they finally gave up on NT and did it over with Solaris.
Why? NT just doesn't scale up.
</blockquote>
<p><b>Tim Newsham writes in response to this article:</b>
</p><blockquote>
"I develop software in NT and in UNIX. I despise NT. It is a horrid
beast, it performs very very poorly and it is way too unstable. Some
parts of NT are so broken that the majority of time porting software to
the system involves working around microsoft bugs. It bothers me that
so many people are migrating away from unix to NT. I can only imagine
that eventually there will be a large anti-NT backlash as management
types realize how much NT has hurt their organizations.
</blockquote>
<p><b>Joseph Day, a consultant in Chicago, replies to Jessie Berst:</b>
</p><blockquote>
"I do a lot of software development on both NT, and 95. I can't seem to
understand why people are hyping up these platforms as being so great.
. . . The support you get in the Linux community through netnews is far
superior to anything that you will ever see with Microsoft products. .
. . NT has a ways to go before it will reach the level of stability
that Linux has.<br>
-- Excerpts from a letter by Joseph Day entitled,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.zdnet.com/anchordesk/talkback/talkback_72950.html">
How did Microsoft pay you to write this article?</a>, Source:
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.zdnet.com/anchordesk/index.html">
Jesse Berst's Anchor Desk.</a> February 16, 1998,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.zdnet.com/">ZDNet</a>.
</blockquote>
<p><b>Torsten Holvak, a systems administrator in Laramie, WY, replies to Jessie Berst:</b>
</p><blockquote>
"Jesse: I'm sure Microsoft, like IBM in the 60s, would love to have
people believe that choosing something other than their products would
be a career-limiting move. But it just ain't so! I'd fire an employee
for putting mission-critical e-mail or Web server applications on an NT
machine rather than a UNIX box. We use FreeBSD for everything and there
is nothing more stable. Not only are free UNIX servers faster, more
powerful, and more stable than NT, but the support is better, too. Just
try to get an answer from a Microsoft tech without paying big bucks
and/or waiting on hold. And consider yourself lucky if it actually
solves your problem. I find it hard to believe that this story appeared
on your front page. It's embarrassing. I sure didn't THINK you were
into spreading Microsoft
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://sagan.earthspace.net/jargon/jargon_21.html#TAG712">
FUD</a>. <br>
-- Excerpts from a letter by Torsten Holvak entitled,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.zdnet.com/anchordesk/talkback/talkback_72969.html">
I'd fire someone for using NT</a>, Source:
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.zdnet.com/anchordesk/index.html">
Jesse Berst's Anchor Desk.</a> February 16, 1998,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.zdnet.com/">ZDNet</a>.
</blockquote>
<p><b>Quinn P. Coldiron, Information Systems Department manager for the
University of Nebraska Press, writes about his experiences with Novell,
Windows NT, and Linux:</b>
</p><blockquote>
"After completing the morning duties, we normally run a complete Cats
[an order fulfillment and inventory system] backup before we continue
with closing which usually would take two hours to complete on the
Netware server. The Linux machine was able to do the entire backup in
45 minutes, cutting a little over an hour off our closing time. This
increase in speed came from a decrease in hardware because the Linux
server was running only 32 MB in RAM and IDE hard drives where the
Netware server had 64 MB in RAM and SCSI drives. The speed increase has
been noticed in daily work also. I get almost daily remarks that the
system seems to be running faster and more reliable.
<p>"We have recently upgraded the CPU to a 200Mhz Pentium and have
upgraded the Memory to 64 MB to handle the newest plans of making this
server replace our Windows NT file/printer server, which still crashes
about twice a month for no reason, even after an additional $1,500 in
tech support with Microsoft. This single computer running Red Hat Linux
will replace both our Novell Netware 3.11 server and our Windows NT 4.0
server, while decreasing total hardware requirements. With the recent
advances from the Samba team in supporting the NT domain structure and
the December 1997 release of Red Hat 5.0, I expect to have a very
efficient and inexpensive server for our Windows 95, Windows NT and
Macintosh clients. <br>
-- Quoted from: <b>
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.ssc.com/lg/issue29/coldiron.html">
Replacing Windows NT Server with Linux</a></b>
</p></blockquote>
<p><b>On September 29, 1997 Nick Johnson writes in a
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://dev4.byte.com/joncon/_fmsg00441.html">Byte Forum</a>:</b>
</p><blockquote>
"From an administrator perspective, I have a very difficult time taking
an operating system seriously when it needs 128 megs of RAM, two
200-Mhz processors and 8 gigs of hard drive space just to run a small
intranet web server, especially when the OS crashes and reboots from a
simple, standard TCP packet. NT is just impossible to consider when
reliability and speed are required. You could perform the same task I
mentioned above on a 386 with 16 megs of RAM running FreeBSD, without
paying the high Microsoft price tag.
</blockquote>
<p><b>
Mike Hucka, a UNIX administrator and programmer in Michigan, writes:</b>
</p><blockquote>
"What boggles my mind is <i>why</i> people are investing so much in NT
solutions when there is so much evidence that the UNIX solutions are
more mature, stable, less expensive, and perform so much better? Why?
What is wrong with people?
<p>"Do people simply not know about the capabilities of UNIX?"
</p><p>"Do people think that UNIX systems are too difficult to use? I may
be biased, but when I look at desktop environments such as CDE on a
Sun, or KDE, I think that's pretty close to what you find on a PC or
Mac. And there is a TREMENDOUS amount of documentation for UNIX now
available -- just consider all the books published by
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.oreilly.com/">O'Reilly & Associates</a>,
or the online manuals available at Sun's site <b>
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://docs.sun.com/">http://docs.sun.com</a></b>, or any of
hundreds of sites with information about every imaginable aspect of
UNIX.
</p><p>"And not only that, but you can get free versions of UNIX that are
comparable in stability and scalability to Solaris, and will run quite
well on PC class hardware if you so choose.
</p><p>"And to top it all off, you can get source code."
</p></blockquote>
<h3><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.unix-vs-nt.org/kirch/feedback/">
Feedback from Readers of this Article</a></h3>
<p>This is a new external section containing some of the best feedback
I have received in response to the article.
</p><hr>
<h2><a name="web">Web Servers</a></h2>
<p>The life-blood of the Internet is the Web. This is the face that
the public sees. If your site is slow, plagued with technical problems,
or inaccessible, this will surely have adverse effects. Since most
large corporations are UNIX-oriented, they normally go with Web server
software like Apache or Netscape-Enterprise.
<b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.apache.org/">Apache</a></b>
was conceived with UNIX in mind. It is free and currently rules the
Internet. Roughly <i>half</i> the Web servers on the Internet are
running Apache (see
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.netcraft.co.uk/Survey/"><b>the Netcraft Web Server
Survey</b></a>). Microsoft's IIS Web server software does not even
amount to one-quarter of all Internet-connected Web servers. Apache is
currently being used by
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://java.sun.com/">Javasoft</a>,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.fbi.gov/">The FBI</a>,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.ft.com/">Financial Times</a>,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.imdb.com/">The Movies Database</a>,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.w3.org/">W3 Consortium</a>,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.royal.gov.uk/">The Royal Family</a>,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.lib.ox.ac.uk/">Oxford University Libraries Automation Service</a>,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.mit.edu/"> M.I.T.</a>,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.harvard.edu/">Harvard University</a>, and the
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.utexas.edu/">University of Texas at Austin</a>.
Netcraft also mentions that "Virtual hosting company
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.rapidsite.com/">Rapidsite</a>
is now the fifth placed server in the survey. Their hosting system,
running a personalised version of Apache, supports 44,280 domain names
on 39,905 distinct ip addresses. An achievement, and probably the
world's largest hosting system." You will recall that in the
performance section of this article the
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.unix-vs-nt.org/kirch/#KickAss">UNIX-Apache marriage put the NT-IIS one to
shame</a>. Not only is Apache fast, it's free.
Apache's rule over the Internet has also been recognized by
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.ibm.com/">IBM</a> who now has a partnership with
Apache:
</p><blockquote>
<b>IBM Teams Up With Apache</b><br>
"IBM will ship the Apache HTTP server with the IBM WebSphere Application
Server, helping
current Apache users to evolve to e-business solutions. As part of the
WebSphere Application
Server package, IBM will provide commercial, enterprise-level support for the Apache HTTP
Server. In addition, IBM will be a full participant in the Apache HTTP Server Project, a
collaborative development effort, and will make contributions to enhance the capabilities of the
Apache HTTP Server. <br>
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.ibm.com/News/1998/06/223.phtml">
IBM helps companies turn simple web sites into powerful e-business
solutions</a>, IBM News, 22 June, 1998.
</blockquote>
<p>For the most robust Web server a corporation could ever need,
Netscape-Enterprise is a great choice. Although it is not
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.opensource.org/">Open Source</a>
like Apache, it will meet the most demanding needs. Netscape-Enterprise
is used by such
companies as
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.bmw.de/">BMW</a>,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.dilbert.com/">Dilbert</a>,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.sgi.com/">Silicon Graphics</a>,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.shell.com/">Shell</a>,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.sun.com/">Sun Microsystems</a>,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.sybase.com/">Sybase</a>,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.ferrari.it/">Ferrari</a> and
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.vatican.va/">The Vatican</a>.
</p><p>Microsoft's IIS is one of the few things that actually comes with
Windows NT. It does not possess any special or unique qualities not
already found in other Web server software. It excels neither in speed,
nor in popularity, nor in the number of concurrent hits it can handle.
It is currently being used by
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.compaq.com/">Compaq</a>,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.nasdaq.com/">Nasdaq</a>,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.nfl.com/">The National Football League</a>,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.exxon.com/">Exxon</a>,
and <a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://shop.tesco.co.uk/">Tesco</a>.
To further substantiate my claim
that Microsoft IIS is not up to speed, while testing the validity of the
links for the sites above, I discovered that
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://shop.tesco.co.uk/">Tesco</a> was unable to service any
requests between 00:02:53 and 00:53:07 GMT on Monday, 22 June 1998.
Their Web server kept returning the message <b>HTTP/1.1 Server Too
Busy</b> despite my repeated attempts from my own domain and from
other domains I telnetted into. The Web server never did manage
to deliver their home page. I simply gave up after 50 minutes of
seeing the same error message from various clients in various domains.
I have only ever seen this message from IIS Web servers.
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://shop.tesco.co.uk/">Tesco</a> is running
Microsoft-IIS/4.0. Telnetting directly into their Web server on port
80 revealed another unprofessional aspect of their site. Despite the
wide availability of ntp servers the world over, their system clock was
off by 8 minutes and 51 seconds.
</p><p><a name="win95">For</a> Windows 95 and NT users, one of the most
popular places on the Web to get freeware and shareware is a site
called <b>
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.windows95.com/">www.windows95.com</a></b>. Due to
the immense popularity of the site it requires a robust operating
system and performance oriented Web server software. Since all the
software offered at this site is exclusively for Windows 95 or NT, and
the overall flavor tends to be very pro-Microsoft, one would assume
that NT servers running IIS would be the logical choice for their
Internet solution. Well, here's
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.windows95.com/about/faq.html">a quote from one of their own Web pages</a>:
</p><blockquote>
<b>What hardware and software is Windows95.com running on?</b>
<blockquote>
We use Pentium Pro computers running the BSDI UNIX operating system
with Apache Web server software. Our servers are connected to the
Internet via multi-homed T3 connections.
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
Note: This quote is from February 1998. They recently changed their
name from Windows95.com to WinFiles.com although they still have use of
the windows95.com domain name. This change took place in March 1998.
<p>To verify what an Internet site is running at any given time,
try the following link:
</p><center>
<b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.netcraft.co.uk/cgi-bin/Survey/whats">
What is that Site Running?</a></b>
</center>
<hr>
<h2><a name="conclusion">Conclusion</a></h2>
<p>Ironically, it seems from the observations of experienced system
administrators that UNIX would be the operating system of choice either
for installations on a tight budget or huge corporations with a demand
for high-powered multi-processor servers requiring a scalable operating
system. <i>Washington Post</i> Staff Writer, Elizabeth Corcoran,
provides us with a real-world example:
</p><blockquote>
Cincinnati Bell Information Systems, for instance, has used Sun
workstations and servers to process checks for several years. It
recently bought several top-of-the-line Sun servers to handle the
demands of a million bills a day. The choices, said James Holtman, CBIS
vice president, were either Sun servers or IBM mainframes. Microsoft's
technology "isn't quite there yet. It has a ways to
grow to match those-size systems," he said.<br>
(<i>The Washington Post</i>, Sunday, February 8, 1998; Page H01)
</blockquote>
Provided that a company is small to medium-sized, has few
mission-critical processes to be run, is willing to hire additional
administrators for their Microsoft Exchange and Internet Information
Server(s), and has a substantial budget for Microsoft's "per server" or
"per seat" licensing scheme, then NT would be the operating system of
choice. The <b>
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.aberdeen.com/">Aberdeen<i>Group</i></a></b> has published an excellent <b>
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.aberdeen.com/research/comp/onsite/case1/body.htm">
case study</a></b> on migrating to Windows NT.
<p>NT is also an excellent choice for managers who need to show that
they used up their fiscal year budget for hardware/software
expenditures. Perhaps this is why it requires no prior purchase
approval within federal agencies; "NT has become the 'unofficial'
standard operating system for the federal government. Federal
employees whose responsibilities include the acquisition of computer
hardware/software require prior written approval from above before
ordering a UNIX operating system or hardware which cannot run Windows
NT. For Intel-based hardware or Windows NT, no prior approval is
required." (as reported by a vendor of Sun solutions who wishes to
remain anonymous)
</p><p>For small shops or power users on a budget, or even medium to large
businesses who are beginning to escape the antiquated mind-set that
performance is best gauged by the last figure on the sales receipt,
Linux or FreeBSD can easily exceed the performance and functionality of
an NT solution, do it with inexpensive Intel-based hardware, and do it
for $0.00, a price Bill Gates will find difficult to beat. Why invest
in an operating system that will require expensive training and
re-training with each new NT release? UNIX/Linux administrators are
plentiful and generally more technically capable than their NT
counterparts (most UNIX administrators have some coding/scripting
skills seldom found among the new generation of "NT admins"). Why spend
almost $5,000 for MS Exchange Server (this price only covers 50 client
accesses), which in some companies, seems to only be able to handle the
e-mail of a few hundred employees when you can use the built-in
"Sendmail" mail server software that ships with Linux, a tried and
proven application capable of supporting the e-mail demands of
thousands of employees?
</p><p>As to the actual overall features and performance of the two
operating systems, it seems that UNIX wins hands down. It offers a
variety of vendors (no threat of a monopoly), scalability, more
efficient use of system resources, remote administration, remote
computing, multi-user capabilities, large palette of (professional)
software resources, vendor independent standards (POSIX), control of
users' disk usage (unlike NT), and can't be crashed by viruses written
10 years ago for DOS computers. But the most important thing of all to
remember from this article when trying to choose between Windows NT and
one of the many UNIX operating systems is this:
</p><blockquote>
A <b>UNIX</b> operating system will give you <b>choices</b>: any type
of hardware, CLI or GUI, commercial or GNU, diverse choice of vendors.
It is <b>dynamic</b>, i.e. you can build a customized kernel to fit the
specific computing needs at hand.
<p><b>Windows NT</b> will give you <b>restrictions</b>: only Intel or
Alpha; no CLI, only GUI (try booting NT into CLI-only mode) and then
only one GUI (no wide choice of windowing systems as can be found under
X); only commercial MTAs, only Microsoft (ever heard of another company
marketing "NT Server clone" operating systems?), etc. NT Server is
<b>static</b>, i.e. you will never be able to build a customized
kernel. One size fits few.
</p></blockquote>
<p>Although Microsoft is not the only "restrictions-oriented" software
vendor promoting its own closed, proprietary solutions, one would hope
that organizations promoting open systems and solutions would prevail.
Netscape is one vendor that promotes diversity and points out
Microsoft's pro-restriction, anti-choice stance regarding various
products:
</p><blockquote>
[Our] strategy is in sharp contrast to that of vendors like Microsoft,
whose business model depends on customers upgrading to the most recent
version of each operating system. Consider that Microsoft's component
model, ActiveX, and the underlying components are designed to run only
on 32-bit Windows. Many Microsoft APIs also run only on 32-bit Windows.
For example, an application that uses ADSI (Microsoft's API to access
the LDAP directory protocol), will not run on existing Win16 clients,
much less on Macintosh or Unix systems. Netscape's LDAP API is
available on 17 platforms in C and many more in Java. In addition,
Microsoft's future platform services like "Viper's" transaction
processing and "Falcon's" messaging only runs on NT 5.0 - an Oracle
database running on Unix, for example, is not supported. The difference
is clear: with Microsoft, developers write to the Windows platform,
with Netscape, they write to the Internet platform.<br>
-- Netscape,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://developer.netscape.com/docs/wpapers/crossware/#advantages">
Netscape ONE Advantages</a>
</blockquote>
<p>It would seem that the question of which operating system to choose
would be academic at this point based on the information I have
provided here, yet every day some highly-capable systems/network
administrator somewhere is told by his/her manager that the company is
switching over to NT. The administrator is left stunned and confused,
for he/she already knows the information contained in this article. It
is the management of your company who should be reading this. All too
often management rocks the boat and disrupts the harmony of stable,
economical, and technically superior implementations when they suddenly
discover that an unapproved operating system has been in use for quite
some time, based solely on political reasons:
</p><blockquote>
"The corporate IT managers notice someday what is that box in the
corner and they tell them that it's the departmental Web server that's
been running for a year and a half, and by the way it's running Linux.
One normal reaction is to upgrade it immediately to NT, but what
happens is that they go back to Linux because the performance
dropped.<br>
--
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.infoworld.com/cgi-bin/displayStory.pl?/interviews/980409torvalds.htm">
Linus Torvalds talks economics and operating systems</a>, InfoWorld, April 9, 1998.
</blockquote>
This very type of incident happened at <b>
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.m-tech.ab.ca/linux-biz/cisco.html">Cisco Systems
Inc.</a></b> but despite the order from senior management to switch
over to NT, they are still running Linux (get the
<b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.unix-vs-nt.org/kirch/#cisco">details</a></b>). Obviously, some of the technical
staff refused to comply with this order. Why do you think that
technical people risk losing their positions over this issue? I'll
leave this question for you to answer.
<p>If you are a manager, try to use this information wisely to enhance
the computing environment at your facility. Talk to your technical
people and ask them what works. Make the right decision. Don't be
fooled by salespeople who use buzz words but can't explain them, let
alone explain their pertinence to <i>your company's</i> computing
goals. Seek out companies who have implemented both Microsoft
<i>and</i> UNIX servers for the type of solution you are considering.
Try meeting with their technical people to get objective, first-hand
reports on the feasibility, difficulty of implementation, and
initial+ongoing maintenance costs associated with your proposed
solution.
</p><hr>
<h2><a name="compare">Linux and NT Server 4.0 at a Glance</a></h2>
<p>Since NT is often chosen on the basis of cost-effective hardware
solutions, Linux will be the UNIX system in this comparison, for it
thrives on Intel hardware.
</p><p>Note: Only the items/features that actually <i>ship</i> with each
operating system are listed here. Perl 5.0, for instance, is available
for all platforms, but Microsoft does not provide this with its
operating systems. On the same note, most distributions of Linux ship
with only about four GUIs (window managers) to choose from, yet you'll
note from a previous section in this article, that this is only a small
number of what is available for Linux, or any other UNIX operating
system for that matter.
</p></td></tr></tbody></table>
</p><p>
<table width="85%" border="1">
<tbody><tr>
<td width="28%"><strong>Component</strong></td>
<td width="28%"><strong>Linux</strong></td>
<td width="32%"><strong>Windows NT Server 4.0</strong></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="28%">Operating System</td>
<td width="28%">Free, or around $49.95 for a CD-ROM distribution</td>
<td width="32%">Five-User version $809<br>
10-User version $1129<br>
EE 25-User Version $3,999</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Free online technical support</td>
<td>Yes,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.linux.org/help/howto.html">
Linux Online</a> or
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.redhat.com/">
Redhat</a></td>
<td>No</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Kernel source
code</td>
<td>Yes</td>
<td>No</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="28%">Web Server</td>
<td width="28%">Apache Web Server</td>
<td width="32%">IIS</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="28%">FTP Server</td>
<td width="28%">Yes</td>
<td width="32%">Yes</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="28%">Telnet Server</td>
<td width="28%">Yes</td>
<td width="32%">No</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>SMTP/POP3 Server</td>
<td>Yes</td>
<td>No</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>DNS</td>
<td>Yes</td>
<td>Yes, though reports indicate that it is a broken implementation
with limited functionality.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Networking</td>
<td>TCP/IP, IPv6, NFS, SMB, IPX/SPX, NCP Server (NetWare Server),
AppleTalk, plus many other protocols</td>
<td>TCP/IP, SMB, IPX/SPX, AppleTalk, plus many other protocols</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>X Window Server<br>
(For running remote <br>
GUI-based applications)</td>
<td>Yes</td>
<td>No</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Remote Management Tools</td>
<td>Yes, all tools</td>
<td>Web Administrator 2.0 (a recent addition)
offers a large, but still not complete,
set of tools.<br></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>News Server</td>
<td>Yes</td>
<td>No</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>C and C++ compilers</td>
<td>Yes</td>
<td>No</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Perl 5.0</td>
<td>Yes</td>
<td>No</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Revision Control</td>
<td>Yes,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://sunsite.unc.edu/LDP/HOWTO/mini/RCS.html">
RCS</a></td>
<td>No</td></tr>
<tr>
<td>Number of file systems supported</td>
<td>32</td>
<td>3</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Disk quotas support</td>
<td>Yes</td>
<td>No</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Number of GUIs (window managers) to choose
from</td>
<td>4</td>
<td>1</td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
<table width="85%" cellspacing="0">
<tbody><tr>
<td>
<p>
</p><hr>
<h2><a name="bigguys">What are Major Companies Deploying?</a></h2>
<p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.amazon.com/">Amazon.com</a></b><br>
Amazon.com Books, the world's largest on-line bookstore, relies on
DIGITAL UNIX AlphaServer 2000 systems to keep its Internet business
open around the clock. DIGITAL VLM64 technology keeps data highly
available to customers. "The extensive Web server capabilities of the
DIGITAL AlphaServer series, coupled with its smooth upgrade path,
provided the perfect solution for our rapid growth curve."
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.boeing.com/">Boeing</a></b><br>
Operating systems: HP-UX, IRIX, Solaris, and more NT than some of
its technical staff would prefer. <br>
<b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.unix-vs-nt.org/kirch/#boeing">Read what Linus Torvalds has to say about Boeing!</a></b><br>
Web server: Netscape-Enterprise 2.01
</p><p>The <b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.dallascowboys.com/">Dallas Cowboys</a></b><br>
Operating systems: <b>
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.sgi.com/Products/hardware/servers/products/Irix.html">
IRIX</a></b>
(Silicon Graphics UNIX Operating System) and UNIX System V Release 4.0<br>
MTA: Netscape Messaging Server 3.01<br>
Web: Netscape-Enterprise 3.0
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.dow.com/">Dow Corning</a></b><br>
"We're a global operation and have always used mainframes. Choosing
Sun was a higher risk than other choices, but they really impressed us
with their technology and commitment. Now that we've worked with Sun,
if we had to do it over again, we wouldn't even consider making a
different decision. Sun is doing an outstanding job." <br>
-- Mark Smith, Manager of Information Technology Systems, Dow Corning
</p><p>
<b><a name="ms-solaris" href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.hotmail.com/">Hotmail</a></b>,
<b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.microsoft.com/">The Microsoft Corporation</a></b>
<br>
This free Web-based e-mail service runs a mixture of Sun Solaris and
FreeBSD. Apache 1.2.1 is the Web server software. After Microsoft
purchased the company in December 1997, they tried to migrate to NT,
but ". . . the demands of supporting 10 million users reportedly proved
too great for NT, and Solaris was reinstated." Get the full story:
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.unix-vs-nt.org/kirch/hotmail.html">
Solaris calls Hotmail shots for Microsoft</a>.
</p><p><b>
<a name="usps" href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.usps.gov/">
United States Postal Service</a></b>
<br>
"The United States Postal Service deployed over 900 Linux based
systems throughout the United States in 1997 to automatically recognize
the destination addresses on mail pieces. Each system consists of 5
dual Pentium Pro 200MHz (PP200) computers and one single PP200 all
running Linux." <br>
-- John Taves,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://members.aa.net/~jtaves/linux.htm">
Linux is reading your mail</a>, April 8, 1998
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.yahoo.com/">Yahoo!</a></b><br>
". . . A couple of days later we added a FreeBSD box to our cluster
of Web servers. Not only did it out-perform the rest of our machines,
but it was more stable. A few weeks into this experiment and we were
sold. Although the price was certainly attractive, it was the
stability, performance, and access to the source code that sold us.
Ever since then we've used FreeBSD almost exclusively for production as
well as our development environment."<br>
-- David Filo, Co-founder of Yahoo! (<i>FreeBSD News</i>, Issue 1)
</p><p>This list of <b>
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.m-tech.ab.ca/linux-biz/">businesses using Linux in
their day-to-day operations</a></b> seeks to inform the public about
the reality of Linux as a viable alternative to commercial UNIX
operating systems. Companies such as
<b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.m-tech.ab.ca/linux-biz/cisco.html">Cisco Systems Inc.</a></b>,
<b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.m-tech.ab.ca/linux-biz/sony.html">Sony WorldWide Networks</a></b>, <b>
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.m-tech.ab.ca/linux-biz/mercedes.html">Mercedes-Benz</a></b>, and <b>
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.m-tech.ab.ca/linux-biz/taxi1.html">Yellow Cab Service Corporation</a></b>
are mentioned. A description of the capacity in which Linux is being
deployed accompanies each company's listing.
</p><p><a name="cisco">InfoWorld recently wrote about the possibility of</a>
<b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.m-tech.ab.ca/linux-biz/cisco.html">Cisco Systems Inc.</a></b>
switching from Linux to Windows NT:
</p><blockquote>
"Speaking of platform changes, Cisco Systems may be switching over its
internal network of print servers. Apparently, the company's current
infrastructure is based on Linux and works very well, but that hasn't
stopped the guys at the top from wanting to mess with it. I'm told
that in light of Cisco's ever-cozier relationship with Microsoft, its
senior management issued an order that the existing system be trashed
in favor of a Windows NT-based setup. Word has it, though, that
inertia has won out, and despite the order from on-high, the printing
system is still -- you guessed it -- Linux-based.<br>
-- Robert X. Cringely,
"No Sunday in the Park: Rain Pushes platforms closer to the precipice," in:
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.infoworld.com/">InfoWorld</a>, February 23, 1998, vol. 20, issue 8, p. 115.
</blockquote>
<p><a name="boeing">Linus Torvalds, the founder of Linux, mentions</a>
in an interview with InfoWorld that Linux can often be on the
"unofficially approved list" at some companies:
</p><blockquote>
"But not many people want to come out of the closet to officially say they are using Linux.
<b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.hq.nasa.gov/">NASA</a></b> is very open about
supporting Linux, as are universities. I know that Linux is used in
places like <b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.boeing.com/">Boeing</a></b>, but I
can't point people to a Web page that says so.<br>
-- <a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.infoworld.com/cgi-bin/displayStory.pl?/interviews/980409torvalds.htm">
Linus Torvalds talks economics and operating systems</a>, InfoWorld, April 9, 1998.
</blockquote>
<p>See also
<b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.unix-vs-nt.org/webservers.html">
Web Servers of 101 Prominent Companies/Organizations</a></b>.
</p><hr>
<h2><a name="links">Related Links</a></h2>
<blockquote>
<p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.bell-labs.com/user/tal/papers/ntdesktop/ntdesktop/ntdesktop.html">
Providing Reliable NT Desktop Services by Avoiding NT Server</a></b><br>
by Thomas A. Limoncelli, Robert Fulmer, Thomas Reingold,
Alex Levine, Ralph Loura,<br>
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.bell-labs.com/">Lucent Technologies, Bell Labs</a>.
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://dtf.external.hp.com/linux/">
HP Delivers 24x7 Worldwide Support For Linux Systems and Applications</a></b>
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.sunworld.com/swol-04-1999/swol-04-idcnt.html">
NT looking great on paper</a></b><br>
Microsoft has stolen mindshare from Unix, says IDC<br>
by Steven Brody,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.sunworld.com/">SunWorld</a>,
19 April 1999.<br>
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.cnn.com/TECH/computing/9904/21/ntpaper.ent.idg/">
CNN.com's version of this same article.</a>
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2242246,00.html">
NT beats Linux ... maybe</a></b><br>
"Study finds NT is faster than Linux as a Web server...at least
according to MS-sponsored tests."<br>
by Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.zdnet.com/sr/">Sm@rt Reseller</a>,
15 April 1999.
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.dhbrown.com/dhbrown/linux.html">
Linux: How Good Is It?</a></b><br>
D.H. Brown Associates, Inc., 12 April 1999.
<!--<P><B><A HREF="/web/20000815100517/http://advisor.gartner.com/n_inbox/hotcontent/hc_2121999_3.html">-->
</p><p><b>
Divorcing Thin Server Software from the Hardware<br>
This article is no longer available.</b><br>
Please direct inquiries concerning this article to the
<a href="mailto:gginfo@gartner.com">GartnerGroup</a>.<br>
by J. Staten,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://advisor.gartner.com/">GartnerGroup Advisor</a>,<br>
"This document examines this issue in detail, particularly the differences
between Linux and FreeBSD, the current de facto leaders in the market."
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://pages.cthome.net/iact/24x7-NTreal.html">
IACT's 24x7 Report</a></b><br>
by John Drabik,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://pages.cthome.net/iact/">IACT</a>
(International Alliance for Compatible Technology).
<!--<P><B><A HREF="/web/20000815100517/http://www.freebsd.org/~andreas/benches/index.html">-->
</p><p><b>Comparison between FreeBSD 3.1 SMP and SuSE Linux 6.0 SMP<br>
(Author has removed this article from FreeBSD's site.)</b><br>
"Looks promising for the Linux 2.2.3 SMP kernel, but actually FreeBSD
is still 19% faster."<br>
by Andreas Klemm,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.freebsd.org/">FreeBSD.org</a>,
14 March 1999.
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit19990311.html">
Windows 2000, Users Zilch:<br>
The Y2K Disaster Parading as Microsoft's
Windows NT Marketing Plan</a></b><br>
by Robert X. Cringely,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.pbs.org/">PBS online</a>,
11 March 1999.
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.zdnet.com/pcweek/stories/news/0,4153,389494,00.html">
IBM to Linux-ize PCs</a></b><br>
by Carmen Nobel and Scott Berinato,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.zdnet.com/pcweek/">PC Week</a> Online,
15 February 1999.
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.zdnet.com/pcweek/stories/news/0,4153,387766,00.html">
Linux: Enterprise-ready</a></b><br>
"2.2 kernel's multiprocessing, improved memory
management deliver enterprise goods"<br>
by Henry Baltazar,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.zdnet.com/pcweek/">PC Week</a> Labs,
1 February 1999.
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,31511,00.html">
Computing heavyweights warm to Linux</a></b><br>
by Stephen Shankland, <a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.news.com/">CNET News.Com</a>,
27 January 1999.
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.theregister.co.uk/990126-000022.html">
Windows NT could triple enterprise upgrade costs - report</a></b><br>
by John Lettice,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.theregister.co.uk/">The Register</a>,
26 January 1999.
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,31458,00.html?st.ne.fd.mdh">
New version of Linux posted</a></b><br>
by Stephen Shankland, <a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.news.com/">CNET News.Com</a>,
26 January 1999.
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.zdnet.com/sr/stories/issue/0,4537,387506,00.html">
Linux Up Close: Time To Switch</a></b><br>
by Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols & Eric Carr,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.zdnet.com/sr/welcome.html">Sm@rt Reseller</a>,
25 January 1999.
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.infoworld.com/cgi-bin/displayStory.pl?990123.whlinux.htm">
Linux bandwagon grows</a></b><br>
by David Pendery, Dan Briody, and Ed Scannell,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.infoworld.com/">
InfoWorld Electric</a>, 23 January 1999.<br>
"Momentum behind the Linux platform will soon surge again with both Hewlett-Packard and
<b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.tivoli.com/">Tivoli Systems</a></b> planning to extend their
management platforms to the open-source Linux platform, according to high-ranking
officials at the two companies."
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,31060,00.html">
Notes headed to Linux</a></b><br>
by Erich Luening, Staff Writer,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.news.com/">CNET News.Com</a>,
18 January 1999.
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.performance-computing.com/columns/penguin/9901.shtml">
Linux 101</a></b><br>
by Jon maddog Hall
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.performance-computing.com/">
Performance Computing</a>,
January 1999.
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,30027,00.html">
Linux shipments up 212 percent</a></b><br>
by Stephen Shankland, <a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.news.com/">CNET News.Com</a>,
16 December 1998.
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.linuxworld.com/linuxworld/lw-1998-12/lw-12-freebsd.html">
The story on FreeBSD: What you should know about this important free
OS</a></b><br>
by Cameron Laird and Kathryn Soraiz,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.linuxworld.com/">LinuxWorld</a>,
December 1998.
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,29416,00.html">
Unix trounces Windows NT in testing</a></b><br>
by Stephen Shankland,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.news.com/">CNET News.Com</a>,
1 December 1998.
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.abcnews.com/sections/tech/FredMoody/moody981120.html">
Charge of the Linux Brigade</a></b><br>
by Fred Moody,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.abcnews.com/">
ABCNEWS.com</a>,
20 November 1998.
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,28215,00.html?st.ne.ni.lh">
Microsoft: Linux a threat to NT</a></b><br>
by Dan Goodin, Stephen Shankland, and Paul Festa,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.news.com/">CNET News.Com</a>,
2 November 1998.
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.opensource.org/halloween/">
The Halloween Documents</a></b><br>
"Microsoft Confidential" Documents with annotations and comments<br>
by Eric S. Raymond, 30 October 1998.
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.techweb.com/wire/story/TWB19981029S0001">
Unix Growth Still Outpaces Win NT</a></b><br>
by Andy Patrizio,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.techweb.com/">TechWeb</a>, 28 October 1998.
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,28065,00.html">
Gates "on the warpath"</a></b><br>
by Bloomberg News,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.news.com/">CNET News.Com</a>,
28 October 1998.
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.techweb.com/se/directlink.cgi?EET19981026S0028">
Finding Unix ain't broke, chip side balks at NT</a></b><br>
by Richard Goering,
EE Times, Issue: 1032, Section: Special Report: Workstations And Windows NT,
26 October 1998.
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.sjmercury.com/business/center/unix102798.htm">
Unix back in the fight with NT</a></b><br>
by Miguel Helft,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.sjmercury.com/">Mercury Center</a>,
26 October 1998.
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.zdnet.com/windows/stories/main/0%2C4728%2C358782%2C00.html">
Wall Street Is Bullish on NT</a></b><br>
by Michael Moeller,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.zdnet.com/winpro/">WindowsPro Magazine</a>,
16 October 1998.
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/zdnn_smgraph_display/0,4436,2149216,00.html">
Novell to unveil directory services on Linux</a></b><br>
by Mary Jo Foley,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.zdnet.com/sr/">Sm@rt Reseller Online</a>,
13 October 1998.
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,26490,00.html">
Intel pushing unified Unix</a></b><br>
by Brooke Crothers, Staff Writer,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.news.com/">CNET News.Com</a>,
17 September 1998.
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.zdnet.com/sr/stories/issue/0,4537,349576,00.html">
Quality Unix for FREE</a></b><br>
by Brett Glass,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.smartreseller.com/">Sm@rt Reseller</a>,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.zdnet.com//">ZDNet</a>,
7 September 1998.
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.sun.com.au/news/onsun/sept98/">
ABC switches to Sun SAP environment:<br>
The Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) has successfully
migrated its SAP development platform from NT to Solaris, running on
Sun boxes</a></b><br>
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.sun.com.au/">
Sun Microsystems Australia</a>,
<i>On#Sun</i>, vol. 5 issue 2, September 1998.
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.independent.co.uk/net/981005ne/index.html">
Beware the penguin, Bill</a></b><br>
by Charles Arthur,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.independent.co.uk/">The Independent</a>,
5 October 1998.
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.computerworld.com/home/features.nsf/all/981005rc1">
Intranets On A Shoestring</a></b><br>
by Chris Lindquist,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.computerworld.com/">Computerworld</a>,
5 October 1998.
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.idg.co.nz/nzweb/b252.html">
Gates pushes hometown to Linux<br>
Linux-based document system costs 10% of Windows NT solution</a></b><br>
by Christine Burns,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.idg.co.nz/nzweb/nzweb.shtml">
Computerworld News</a>,
4 October 1998.
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.zdnet.com/windows/nt/security/ntbugtraq/">
Service Pack 4 vs. NT 5 (a.k.a. NT2000)</a></b><br>
by Russ Cooper,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.zdnet.com//">ZDNet</a>,
29 September 1998.
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.performance-computing.com/opinions/throttle/9809.shtml">
NT's Cloudy Future</a></b><br>
by Mark Hall,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.performance-computing.com/">Performance COmputing</a>,
September 1998.
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/zdnn_smgraph_display/0,4436,2140612,00.html">
New Security Flap Over Windows NT</a></b><br>
by Mary Jo Foley,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.smartreseller.com/">Sm@rt Reseller</a>,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/">ZDNN</a>,
23 September 1998.
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.nikkeibp.asiabiztech.com/Database/98_Sep/21/Fea.01.gwif.html">
Linux Surfaces As Alternative to Windows NT</a></b><br>
by Masahiro Nakamura, Staff Editor,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://nc.nikkeibp.co.jp/eng/">Nikkei Computer</a>,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.nikkeibp.asiabiztech.com/">AsiaBizTech</a>,
21 September 1998.
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit19980910.html">
A Fight to the Finnish<br>
Why Linux Quite Appropriately Scares
the Bejesus Out of Microsoft</a></b><br>
by Robert X. Cringely,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.pbs.org/">PBS online</a>,
10 September 1998.
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.msnbc.com/news/193825.asp">
Dell ships PCs, servers with Linux</a></b><br>
by Connie Guglielmo of
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/">ZDNN</a>,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.msnbc.com/news/">MSNBC</a>,
8 September 1998.
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.softwaremag.com/Sept98/sm098cv.htm">
In LINUX We . . .</a></b><br>
by Ann Harrison,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.softwaremagazine.com/">
Software Magazine</a>, Cover Story, September 1998.
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.latimes.com/HOME/NEWS/CUTTING/lat_linux0824.htm">
Linux, an Alternative to Microsoft Windows, Shows Value of
Free Software</a></b><br>
by Leslie Helm, Times Staff Writer,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.latimes.com/">Los Angeles Times</a>,
24 August 1998.
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.wired.com/news/news/technology/story/14450.html">
NASA Greets Beowulf</a></b><br>
by Michael Stutz, <a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.wired.com/news/">Wired News</a>,
17 August 1998.
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.zdnet.com/windows/wpro/9809/fs_datacenter_01.html">
Is NT Ready for the Data Center?</a></b><br>
by Joseph P. McGarvey,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.zdnet.com/winpro/">Windows Pro Magazine</a>,
26 August 1998.
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.techweb.com/wire/story/TWB19980728S0004">
Microsoft Admits NT Trails Solaris</a></b><br>
by Barbara Darrow and Stuart Glascock,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.crn.com/">Computer Reseller News</a>,
28 July 1998.
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www2.computerworld.com/852564bb0045a5c0/69747ca2461a6aee852564ea0052c19c/7c87db1b2bb59d56852564ec00700a32?OpenDocument">
NT vs. UNIX: An uphill battle</a></b><br>
by Kevin Burden,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.computerworld.com/">Computerworld</a>,
August 1998.
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.techweb.com/se/directlink.cgi?CRW19980817S0029">
Open OS Provides Flexible, Stable Computing Platform --
Linux Environment Offers Endless Possibilities</a></b><br>
by Paula Rooney,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.techweb.com/">Computer Retail Week (TechWeb)</a>,
17 August 1998, Issue: 215, Section: Business Solutions
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.lantimes.com/98/98aug/808b001a.html?st.ne.fd.mnaw">
Linux legitimacy rallies NT skeptics</a></b><br>
by R. Scott Raynovich and Polly Sprenger,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.lantimes.com/">LAN Times</a>,
17 August 1998.
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.byte.com/art/9801/sec19/art4.htm">
Putting Unix in All the Right Places:
The reports of Unix's death are greatly exaggerated.</a></b><br>
by John Montgomery,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.byte.com/">Byte</a>,
January 1998.
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,25013,00.html?st.ne.fd.gif.c">
Report: Wait on NT 5.0</a></b><br>
by Ben Heskett,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.news.com/">CNET News.Com</a>,
6 August 1998.
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.techweb.com/wire/story/TWB19980629S0013?st.ne.fd.mnaw">
Users Should Skip NT 5.0, Analysts Say</a></b><br>
by David Wilby, <a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.techweb.com/">TechWeb</a>,
29 June 1998.
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.linuxgazette.com/issue31/raymond.html">
Open Source's First Six Months</a></b><br>
by Eric Raymond,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.linuxgazette.com/">Linux Gazette</a>,
August 1998.
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.sunworld.com/sunworldonline/swol-08-1998/swol-08-linuxvnt.html">
Linux versus NT:
Are you getting the most from your OS?</a></b><br>
by Cameron Laird,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.sunworld.com/">SunWorld Online</a>,
August 1998.
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://cnnfn.com/hotstories/washun/9807/23/senate/">
Foes fire at Microsoft</a></b> <br>
<b>"<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.real.com/">RealNetworks</a> exec tells
Senate panel software giant 'breaks' his product"</b><br>
by staff writer John Frederick Moore,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://cnnfn.com/">CNN Financial Network</a>,
23 July 1998.
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.bootnet.com/youaskedforit/lip_linux_manifesto.html">
Linux manifesto</a></b> (A
<b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.bootnet.com/boot.html">boot</a></b>
interview with Linus Torvalds)
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.infoworld.com/cgi-bin/displayStory.pl?980717.whorlinux.htm">
Oracle to port database to Linux after all</a></b><br>
by Paul Krill, <a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.infoworld.com/">
InfoWorld Electric</a>, 17 July 1998.
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.infoworld.com/cgi-bin/displayStory.pl?980717.whinformix.htm">
Informix gets set to embrace Linux</a></b><br>
by Paul Krill, <a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.infoworld.com/">
InfoWorld Electric</a>, 17 July 1998.
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/zdnn_smgraph_display/0,3441,2120879,00.html">
NT: One step forward, two steps back</a></b><br>
by Mary Jo Foley, <a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/">ZDNN</a>,
20 July 1998.
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.techweb.com/se/directlink.cgi?INW19980427S0003">
NT Needs Patch To Comply With Y2K</a></b><br>
by Ellis Booker, <a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.techweb.com/">TechWeb</a>
(InternetWeek, issue 712), 27 April 1998.
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.isdmag.com/Editorial/1998/CoverStory9807.html">
Engineers Speak Out: Linux vs. Windows NT, Part 1</a></b><br>
by Murry Shohat, <a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.isdmag.com/">
<i>Intergrated System Design</i> Magazine</a>, July 1998.
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.pcquest.com/editorial/edit-may98.html">
The "Decline" and Rise of Unix</a></b><br>
by Prasanto K. Roy, <a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.pcquest.com/">
PC Quest</a>.
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.zdnet.com/pccomp/features/fea0797/nt/">
NT Lies</a></b><br>
by Ed Bott, <a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.zdnet.com/">ZDNet</a>, July 1997.
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://slashdot.org/articles/9804211730214.shtml">
Sun Joins Linux International</a></b><br>
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://slashdot.org/">Slashdot</a>, 21 May 1998.
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://slashdot.org/articles/980529098226.shtml">
Update on Sun joining Linux International</a></b><br>
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://slashdot.org/">Slashdot</a>, 29 May 1998.
</p><p><b>
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://earthspace.net/~esr/writings/cathedral-paper.html">
The Cathedral and the Bazaar</a></b><br>
by Eric S. Raymond, 29 January 1998.
</p><p><b>
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.aberdeen.com/research/comp/viewpnts/1997/v10n20/97090178.htm">
Microsoft: The Joker of Enterprise IS Computing</a></b><br>
by The <b>
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.aberdeen.com/">Aberdeen<i>Group</i></a></b>,
Executive Viewpoint, Volume 10 / Number 20, September 29, 1997.
</p><p><b>
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.aberdeen.com/research/comp/whtpaper/1998/98031201/98031201.htm">
Interoperability: Possibility or Elusive Dream? -- An Executive White Paper</a></b><br>
by The <b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.aberdeen.com/">Aberdeen<i>Group</i></a></b>, March 1998.
</p><p><b>
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.aberdeen.com/ab_abstracts/body1.htm">
<i>OnSite</i> - Case Study: Migration Migraines</a></b><br>
by The <b>
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.aberdeen.com/">Aberdeen<i>Group</i></a></b>, 1997.
</p><p><b>
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.aberdeen.com/ab_abstracts/body2.htm">
Case Study: Horns of a Dilemma</a></b><br>
by The <b>
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.aberdeen.com/">Aberdeen<i>Group</i></a></b>.
</p><p><b>
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.computerworld.com/home/online9697.nsf/all/970724windows">
Windows NT no match for UNIX, IDC says</a></b><br>
by Rob Guth, <b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.computerworld.com/">Computerworld</a></b>, 7-24-97.
</p><p><b>
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.infoworld.com/cgi-bin/displayNew.pl?/petrel/np102896.htm">
It will take less drive to make most PC operating
systems work like Unix</a></b><br>
by Nicholas Petreley, <a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.infoworld.com/">InfoWorld</a>,
28 October 1996.
</p><p><b>
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.infoworld.com/cgi-bin/displayTC.pl?/97poy.win3.htm#linux">
1997 Product of the Year Award: Operating Systems - Network Operating System</a></b><br>
by Eric Hammond, <a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.infoworld.com/">InfoWorld</a> Test Center.
</p><p><b>
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.infoworld.com/cgi-bin/displayTC.pl?/97poy.supp.htm">
1997 Product of the Year Award: Best Technical Support Award</a></b><br>
by Ed Foster, <a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.infoworld.com/">InfoWorld</a> Test Center.
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://odin.appliedtheory.com/linux-activism/">
Linux Reviews and Articles</a></b> by Christopher Blizzard. <br>
This page lists 65 articles or reviews of Linux.
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://currents.net/magazine/national/1524/inet1524.html">
Linux Grows Up: Red Hat's commercial Linux beats NT at its own
game</a></b>, by Maggie Biggs.<br>
The author is a senior analyst in the
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.infoworld.com/">InfoWorld</a>
Test Center. She specializes in database technology and application
design, development, and deployment via intranets and other networks.
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.sun.com/sunworldonline/swol-01-1998/swol-01-linux.html">
Linux lines up for the enterprise:
Is there a place in your shop for this inexpensive UNIX?</a></b><br>
by Rick Cook, in:
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.sun.com/sunworldonline/swol-01-1998/">SunWorld - January 1998</a>.
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.nwfusion.com/intranet/0330linux.html">
Lookin' into Linux</a></b><br>
by Mark Gibbs, Network World, March 30, 1998.
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://guide.sbanetweb.com/press/nw818.html">
Doing the math to resolve the NT vs. UNIX debate</a></b><br>
by Wayne Spivak, Network World, August 18, 1997
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.iserver.com/servers/compare/bsd_vs_nt.html">
The advantages of using BSDI BSD/OS over Windows NT Server</a></b><br>
iServer - Verio Web Hosting Inc. - Virtual Servers
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.zdnet.com/sr/business/opportunity/980211b.html">
Linux: Not Just For Geeks And College Kids Anymore</a></b>, by Jason Perlow,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.zdnet.com/">ZDNet</a>, February 11, 1998.
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.zdnet.com/pcmag/issues/1613/pcmg0068.htm">
Leaning Toward Linux: Powerful, robust, and free, Linux is worth
investigating, especially if you plan to set up an Internet
domain</a></b> by Neil Randall,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.zdnet.com/pcmag/issues/1613/contents.htm">
ZDNet - PC Magazine Online, July 1997, Vol 16, No. 13.</a>
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://citv.unl.edu/linux/LinuxPresentation.html">
Replacing Windows NT Server with Linux</a></b> by Quinn P. Coldiron,
Information Systems Department manager for the University of Nebraska
Press.
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.unix.digital.com/unix/v4/dhbrown/AIX43.htm">
An In-Depth Analysis of Five Commercial UNIX Operating Systems and
Windows NT Server 4.0 (Enterprise Edition) by D.H. Brown Associates,
Inc.</a></b>
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.bsdi.com/white-papers/compare">
Comparing BSDI and NT:
Building Intranet and Internet Servers with BSDI and Windows NT</a></b>
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.standishgroup.com/syst.html">
The Standish Group - SUN Also Rises: Solaris Vs. NT</a></b>
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.bitwizard.nl/unixnt.html">
BitWizard B.V. "UNIX vs. NT"</a></b>
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://pubsys.cmp.com/nc/701/701hreportb.html">
THE H-REPORT: Which Operating System For Your 'Intranet'?</a></b>
</p><p><b><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.ssc.com/lj/issue46/2494.html">
Linux Helps Bring <i>Titanic</i> to Life</a></b><br>
Daryll Strauss,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.ssc.com/lj/">LINUX Journal</a>,
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.ssc.com/lj/issue46/">Issue #46</a>, February 1998.
</p></blockquote>
<hr>
<h2><a name="acknowledgments">Acknowledgments</a></h2>
<p>I would like to welcome three new editors who are volunteering
their services to the UNIX versus NT Organization: Bengt Kleberg,
Gregory J. Pryzby, and Robert G. Werner.
</p><p>My very special thanks to Martin Vermeer, who, thanks to his advice
on form, argumentation presented herein, as well as having provided
numerous valuable and sometimes explosive links, has been,
and continues to be, an invaluable contributor to the
positive development of this dynamic project. My deepest appreciation
goes to the translators who have been generous enough to donate their
time to this worthy cause: Brian Lin for the Traditional Chinese and
Simplified Chinese versions, Davor Ocelic for the Croatian translation,
Hanus Adler for the Czech translation,
Kobayashi Osamu for the Japanese translation, Donghun Han for the
Korean translation, Bruno H. Collovini for the Portuguese translation,
and Ilgam Vasilyev for the Russian translation, and Carlos
Lizárraga C. for the Spanish translation.
My thanks also to Nat Makarevitch, Sebastien Blondeel, and
Dennis Allard who are currently working on the French translation,
and to Guglielmo Alfieri, Michele Dalla Silvestra,
and Sergio Felleti who are working on the Italian translation.
</p><p>I would also like to thank the many readers who have contributed
links to important new articles on this topic, for instance, Lance
Bayless, Klaus A. Brunner,
Radovan Bukoci,
Peter Chen, Reinier de Vos,
Martin Espinoza,
Ariel Faigon, Paul Fischer, P. Gopalakrishnan,
Colin Kabaara,
Raj Mathur, Howard McKinney,
Adrian Mikeliunas,
Mike Miller, Mike Stephens, Jim Mohr,
Gene Mosher, Philip Obbard,
John Oram, Conrad Sanderson, Markus Senoner, Steve Sinnott,
Ryan Sumner, Raj Warty, Ken Webster, and countless others.
</p><p>Equally appreciated is the constructive criticism from Keith H.J.
Bevins, Joris Braakman, Marty Cawthon,
Phillip Chu, Baruch Cochavy, Nicholas Donovan,
Julian Elischer, Steve Fuller, Alex Gogan, Jake Hamby, Peter Jeremy,
Adam Johnson, Geoffrey King, Hannu Krosing, Greg Lehey, Kimberly
McBride, Richard Smith, and David Waine, to name just a few.
</p><p>No less important was the assistance provided by Leif Erlingsson and
Damon Conway back around the end of March when I had to upgrade my
connection and needed their mirroring services, both of whom continue
to provide mirrors to this site. Last but not least, my thanks to Ryan
Sumner for his everlasting moral support on this project.
</p></td></tr></tbody></table>
</p><p><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://validator.w3.org/"><img border="0" src="./Microsoft Windows NT Server 4.0 versus UNIX_files/vh40.gif" alt="Valid HTML 4.0!" height="31" width="88"></a>
</p><p><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815100517/http://www.unix-vs-nt.org/legal.html">©1998 kirch.net Consulting, Inc.</a>
</p></center>
<!--
FILE ARCHIVED ON 10:05:17 Aug 15, 2000 AND RETRIEVED FROM THE
INTERNET ARCHIVE ON 2:25:23 May 12, 2016.
JAVASCRIPT APPENDED BY WAYBACK MACHINE, COPYRIGHT INTERNET ARCHIVE.
ALL OTHER CONTENT MAY ALSO BE PROTECTED BY COPYRIGHT (17 U.S.C.
SECTION 108(a)(3)).
-->
</body></html>
举报
请认真填写举报原因，尽可能描述详细。
请选择举报类型
误判申诉
此处可能存在不合适展示的内容，页面不予展示。您可通过相关编辑功能自查并修改。
如您确认内容无涉及 不当用语 / 纯广告导流 / 暴力 / 低俗色情 / 侵权 / 盗版 / 虚假 / 无价值内容或违法国家有关法律法规的内容，可点击提交进行申诉，我们将尽快为您处理。
马建仓 AI 助手
尝试更多
代码解读
代码找茬
代码优化