From: ** http://www.mi * ** com/ntserver/nts/news/msnw/LinuxMyths.asp * ** * SS ** Linux Myths * S SS ** Posted: Oct * S SS ** * S ** With all * SS TT ** d Linux as an operating system, it's importan * S TT ** and look at the reality. First, it's worth noting * SS S T TT ** ing system. Linux fundamentally relies ** SS S T ** chnology and architecture. Linux was not ** SS T AA ** ort symmetrical multiproce ** T A AA ** ces (GUI), asynchronous I/O, fine-grained ** T A AA ** ortant characteristics of a modern operati ** T AA A ** tations mean that as customers look f ** A AA A N ** eploy scalable, secure, and robust applica ** A AA NN ** on the hype. ** A A N N N ** Myth: Linux performs b ** A N N N ** ** A N N N EE ** Reality: Windows NT 4.0 Ou ** N N N E EE ** Workloads ** N N N E EE ** ** NN EE ** The Linux community claims to ha ** N E EE SS ** scalability in the latest versions ** E EE S SS ** r it's clea that Linux remains inferior to the W ** EE S SS * ** EE S * For File and Print services, acco ** EE SS * conducted by PC Week Labs, the Wind ** S * system delivers 52 percent better per ** SS S * processor system and 110 percent better ** SS S * 4-way system than similarly configured si ** SS * and 4-way Linux/SAMBA systems. ** * For Web servers, the same PC Week tests showe ** * s NT 4.0 with Internet Information Server 4.0 delive ** percent better performance on a single processor system a 125 percent be er performance on a 4-way system than Linux and Apache. ** For e-co * ** orkloads using secure sockets (SSL), recent PC Maga * ** showed Windows NT 4.0 with Internet Inform * SS ** .0 delivers approximately five times the perfo * S SS ** y Linux and Stronghold. For * S SS ** ed Line of Business applications, Win * S ** d a result of 40,368 tpmC at a co * SS TT ** on on a Compaq 8-Way Pentium III X * S TT ** his industry leading * SS S T TT ** e Transaction Processing ** SS S T ** shows how Windows NT c ** SS T AA ** for heavy duty transaction pro ** T A AA ** hat there is not a single TPC r ** T A AA ** nux, and therefore Linux h ** T AA A ** ities as a database server. ** A AA A N ** Linux perfo ** A AA NN ** urally limited in the 2.2 Kerne ** A A N N N ** (GB) of RAM on the x86 arch ** A N N N ** dows NT 4.0. The largest ** A N N N EE ** rsus 16 terabytes (TB) for ** N N N E EE ** is limited to 128 MB. In ** N N N E EE ** any of the modern operating ** NN EE ** 0 has pioneered such as asy ** N E EE SS ** and fine-grained kernel loc ** E EE S SS ** limit the ability of Linux to ** EE S SS * The Linux community continues t ** EE S * performance improvements. They ha ** EE SS * since the development of the 2.0 Ke ** S * g a scalable system is a complex task and ** SS S * the Linux community can solve these issues ** SS S * . As D. H. Brown Associates noted in a recent ** SS * rt,2 the Linux 2.2 Kernel remains in the early stage ** * ing a tuned SMP kernel. ** * ** Myth: Linux is more reliable than Windows NT Reality: Linux N ** Real World Proof Points Rather than Anecdotal Stories * ** * ** The Linux com * SS ** o talk about Linux as a stable and reliable operating sy * S SS ** re no real world data or metrics and very limited cus * S SS ** ck up these claims. * S ** Wi * SS TT ** en in demanding customer e * S TT ** operating system. Customers * SS S T TT ** eing Company, Chicago ** SS S T ** daq and many others run m ** SS T AA ** dows NT 4.0. Lin ** T A AA ** aling File System. This means ** T A AA ** ure (such as a power outage) ** T AA A ** e. In any event, the system mu ** A AA A N ** system during system rest ** A AA NN ** sume an extended amount of tim ** A A N N N ** may require manual interven ** A N N N ** . There are no comm ** A N N N EE ** gies to provide High Availa ** N N N E EE ** ty may point to numerous pro ** N N N E EE ** aiming to deliver High ** NN EE ** rown recently noted that these ** N E EE SS ** largely unproven in the dem ** E EE S SS ** There are no OEMs that provid ** EE S SS * unlike Windows NT where Compaq, ** EE S * Hewlett-Packard, IBM, and Unisys ** EE SS * system-level uptime guarantees for ** S * s. ** SS S * Myth: Linux is Free ** SS S * ** SS * Reality: Free Operating System Does Not Mean Low T ** * f Ownership ** * ** The Linux community will talk about the free or low-cost ature of Linux. It's important to nderstand that licensing cost is only a small part of the overall decision ** ng process for customers. * ** The cos * ** erating system is only a small percentage of the ov * SS ** st of ownership (TCO). In general Windows NT ha * S SS ** a lower cost of ownership than UNIX. Prev * S SS ** own that Windows NT has 37 percent low * S ** is no reason to believe that Li * SS TT ** rent than other versions of UNIX w * S TT ** * SS S T TT ** an Open Software effort means ** SS S T ** Hat will make money by c ** SS T AA ** mmercial support services for ** T A AA ** ikely be priced at a premi ** T A AA ** into the total cost model. ** T AA A ** Linux is ** A AA A N ** therefore complex to configur ** A AA NN ** ay find the transition to ** A A N N N ** r existing Windows®-based ** A N N N ** more difficult to hand ** A N N N EE ** training will add significant cos ** N N N E EE ** Linux is a higher ris ** N N N E EE ** le how many certified engi ** NN EE ** is it to find skilled develo ** N E EE SS ** Who performs end-to-end tes ** E EE S SS ** These factors and more need t ** EE S SS * choosing a platform for your bu ** EE S * ** EE SS * Myth: Linux is more secure than Windows NT ** S * ** SS S * Reality: Linux Security Model Is Weak ** SS S * ** SS * All systems are vulnerable to security issues, how ** * mportant to note that Linux uses the same security model as the origi ** * implementations--a model that was not designed from th ** und up to be secure. Linux onl ** vides access controls for files and directories. In contrast * ** object in Windows NT, from files to operating system * ** ures, has an access control list and its use can be * SS ** appropriate. Linux * S SS ** or-nothing. Administrators cannot delegate admi * S SS ** s: a user who needs any administrative cap * S ** full administrator, which co * SS TT ** actices. In contrast, Windows NT a * S TT ** egate privileges at an * SS S T TT ** . ** SS S T ** ty accreditation standards. E ** SS T AA ** y since Windows NT 3.5 ** T A AA ** level under the U.S. Gover ** T A AA ** C2-equivalent level under t ** T AA A ** ss. In contrast, no Linux pro ** A AA A N ** ment's evaluated product lis ** A AA NN ** Linux system ** A A N N N ** nts of time understanding t ** A N N N ** g what to do about them. Th ** A N N N EE ** that there isn't a centr ** N N N E EE ** be reported and fixed. In contras ** N N N E EE ** ity repository for notifica ** NN EE ** issues. Configuring Linux securit ** N E EE SS ** n expert in the intricacies o ** E EE S SS ** components interact. Misconfi ** EE S SS * system and the system could be ** EE S * NT security is easy to set up and ** EE SS * h as the Security Configuration Editor. ** S * ** SS S * Myth: Linux can replace Windows on the desktop ** SS S * ** SS * Reality: Linux Makes No Sense at the Desktop ** * ** * Linux as a desktop operating system makes no sense. A ** would end up with a system that has fewer applications, is more compl to use and manage, and is le intuitive. ** Linux do * ** rovide support for the broad range of hardwar * ** day; Windows NT 4.0 currently supports over 39,000 * SS ** evices on the Hardware Compatibility List. * S SS ** upport important ease-of-use tech * S SS ** g and Play, USB, and Power Man * S ** Th * SS TT ** operating system and c * S TT ** ing GUIs would make * SS S T TT ** rtaking and would add ** SS S T ** L ** SS T AA ** mited, meaning that cus ** T A AA ** own horizontal and verti ** T A AA ** rom Forrester Research highlig ** T AA A ** of enterprise ISVs develop a ** A AA A N ** nly 13 percent develop for ** A AA NN ** ** A A N N N ** Summary ** A N N N ** The Linux operating syst ** A N N N EE ** sage by business or home users. To ** N N N E EE ** can be confident in delivering appl ** N N N E EE ** and reliable--yet cost effective t ** NN EE ** has a long way to go to be competitive with ** N E EE SS ** f the Windows 2000 operating system, Mic ** E EE S SS ** superiority of the platform even fur ** EE S SS * deliver the next generation applications to so ** EE S * . ** EE SS * More information ** S * ** SS S * Customer Testimonials ** SS S * See how these leading companies and organization ** SS * d Windows NT Server 4.0: ** * ** * Nasdaq ** Barnes & Noble Dell Compu r Corp The Boein ** pany Chicago * ** change * ** Gartner Group * SS ** New reports * S SS ** e important questions about the future role of Linux. * S SS ** * S ** Wi * SS TT ** tion for Windows Desktops? * S TT ** * SS S T TT ** serious competitor for ** SS S T ** ll not disappear from the c ** SS T AA ** 199 ** T A AA ** "Whil ** T A AA ** oles, it will not gain broad a ** T AA A ** and Windows in the enterpris ** A AA A N ** Red Hat's F ** A AA NN ** "We examine R ** A A N N N ** he Linux market and why ** A N N N ** e conclusion, despite the succe ** A N N N EE ** ** N N N E EE ** Performance Data ** N N N E EE ** See Industry Benchmarks Show W ** NN EE ** Linux ** N E EE SS ** ** E EE S SS ** Footnotes ** EE S SS * 1. Siemens & SuSE announced a patch in ** EE S * 4 GB, although this is not part of the 2 ** EE SS * utions. ** S * 2. Linux: How Good Is It? D. H. Brown Associ ** SS S * ** SS S * 3. Forrester Research, Software Vendors Crown Se ** SS * Aug. 31, 1999 ** * |--------------------------------------------------------------------| | This file has been borrocksed by Borrocks 95. | | (c) 1999 Scott A. Belmonte, Lachlan M. D. Cranswick | | http://www.ccp14.ac.uk/people/lachlan/borrocks/ | |--------------------------------------------------------------------|