Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Windows vs. Unix Revisited

Posted by michael on from the save-a-million-bucks-or-two dept.

dubious9 writes "Linuxworld has another TCO (Total Cost of Ownership) comparison of Windows vs. Unix. Note that is it not a Linux comparison or a specific Unix comparison at all. The comparison here is the Windows client/server model vs. the terminal/server Unix model. It discusses the needs of a school/university and considers such facts as what the students will have to run at home. It's written by a self proclaimed Unix evangelist, so don't expect it to be unbiased, but he makes points that are hard to argue with. All in all, it is a refreshing TCO comparison."

5 of 388 comments (clear)

  1. Anybody home? by melted · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Terminal Services for Windows has been available for like 4 or 5 years now. Why not use terminal approach with windows, too, if you need it that much?
    *

  2. Huh? by mythosaz · · Score: 0, Redundant

    The comparison here is the Windows client/server model vs. the terminal/server Unix model.

    Where's the comparison between Windows TERMINAL/server model vs. terminal/server Unix model? Aren't Terminal Server and Citrix options any longer on the Wintel platform?

  3. Re:give it a rest..... by hackstraw · · Score: 1, Redundant

    I'll agree, right tool for the job.

    I don't care how much people love samba, it cannot be a real domain controler, and even if it could, I really don't think it would be worth the effort. Why would you settle for 99% compatability? I work for a university and that is pretty much what windows servers do. (I've always called them password checkers :)

    I prefer UNIX/Linux, its what I do. And I just think that its better for big "enterprise" kinds of apps like busy web servers, databases, number crunching, etc. Windows doesn't really run on a 64bit platform, which can be a showstopper.

    As far as my personal computing, I use linux on an HP laptop. However, the TCO is the same because the laptop came with XP already on it, but I don't have office or any other $$ apps. And if I were to use office products daily, I surely would not use OpenOffice on Linux. Again, why settle for 99% compatability.

  4. Re:If opensource is so wonderful... by The+Bungi · · Score: 0, Redundant
    I understand the point you're trying to make, but Mozilla is not the best thing to do it with. It's actually an excellent browser. In some aspects it's better than IE.

    It if wasn't for the fact that it takes bloody ages to load and consumes about three times the memory that IE uses, I'd be using it as my primary browser.

  5. What do you mean, "not unbiased"? by ryanvm · · Score: 0, Redundant

    It's written by a self proclaimed Unix evangelist, so don't expect it to be unbiased.

    *gasp* A biased Linux article on Slashdot? Get out.