Freebsd vs. linux

Anthony Atkielski atkielski.anthony at
Tue Feb 15 05:40:17 GMT 2005

David Kelly writes:

> Servers should also have the most reliable software but that is where
> Microsoft cuts corners for additional profit and provide employment
> for MSCE's whom otherwise would not be needed.

No, Microsoft does not deliberately cut any corners, nor does it care
about providing employment for MCSEs.

Microsoft doesn't understand servers very well.  Most people at
Microsoft grew up using microcomputers, and that's all they know (sound
familiar?).  They truly have no idea of some of the constraints that
apply to the server world.  As a result, they don't build ideal server
software.  The closest they've come has been with the early versions of
Windows NT, which had a very solid kernel.  But since desktops seemed to
be more lucrative than servers, they regularly gutted the OS with each
new release in order to provide things like better game performance and
a prettier GUI, destabilizing it and rendering it less secure.  Today's
NT-based kernel is much less "pure" than the original.

Even so, Windows 200x is quite stable, stable enough to work in a server
environment in many cases.  I'd still prefer UNIX for maximum
reliability and stability, but Windows does a respectable job for less
critical applications.

> There is no reason a server should not have a GUI so long as it does
> not detract from the server's function.

A GUI always detracts from a server's function.  Nobody is sitting in
front of a server, so spending a lot of resources on a pretty graphic
interface is a complete waste, and it destabilizes the machine.  This is
something that Microsoft (and some other parties) have trouble

> Use of a GUI to "dumb-down" the system doesn't work as Microsoft has
> shown.

That has never been an objective of Microsoft.  Their servers have
elaborate GUIs because the operating systems come from the desktop
world, and won't function without a GUI.

One of the most serious criticisms made of Windows in the server world
is that you cannot run a Windows server without a GUI, and remote
administration is an unbelievably awkward nightmare.

> Apple is smart enough to pull it off ...

Apple has no advantage over Microsoft in this respect.  They are locking
their own OS into a GUI, too.  But they probably realize that their
future is in desktops, not servers.

> ... but all Microsoft has done is continue to guarantee employment for
> MSCE's who continue to exclusively recommend any and everything
> Microsoft who in turn continually ensures these champions stay
> employed.

As I've said, Microsoft doesn't care about employment of MCSEs.


More information about the freebsd-questions mailing list