I'm setting up a server in a few weeks and am not sure which to use. I'm leaning toward Linux because I'm sick of Windows, but I want to get people's opinions on which would work better for me. I know zipola about Linux, and a ton about Windows. You have to remember that. Any advice would be good. Thanks! [addsig]

Linux is many times too hard (especially when you haven't used it before, or when you're doing something new and you're too lazy to read the manual).

Microsoft is doing everything they can to make you feel like an idiot, I saw this in W2000 Professional:

"Did you know this?" - "If you click twice on a programs icon (double-click), that program is started."

Idiots....

Did I mention already that the GNU/Linux operating system was very good?

Yeah, get that. It's really easy to set up a server in Linux (especially with Debian)....

ok fsvara , we know that you love Linux (debian) very much , but we also have to think about what he (Twintop) already knows . So , here's my opinoin :
M$ Windows is not BAD (also not good at all) , but you got experience with it . Linux is easy to learn if you want it (only if you REALLY want to!) I personally want you to use Linux , but I can't force you in any way . It's up to you if you want to learn something new (that will maybe help you in your long life ) or if you're going to learn NOTHING and use windows . I myself would try to learn something new . You know , I think that there has to be a challenge . OK , in Windows it may be also a challenge for you (dunno) , but learning Linux is also a challenge . And , after you've learned Linux you actually feel like you've learned something really good (at least I felt that way) .
Why not face a challenge sometimes ? let's be a bit adventurous !
But , in the end it's up to you ... this is only what I think ... maybe you can also think about it if you want
[addsig]

yeah, but it's not a question of expertise, i think, for servers... win2k does everything for you.

setting up a server is a snap in debian. you don't have to do anything either. However, in debian, yopu have the possibility--> to do a lot of stuff with it.
I'd really use Linux, not only because it just rulez. But if you want aworking server, win2k and linux are just as easy to use, and if you want to have fun and experiment with it, Linux is the way to go.

I've been toying around with getting a lunix-booting machine anyway because I know it would help me (you guys know how much time I spent trying to make the computer I'm on into a dual-boot. ). I'll look into Debian and other types of Linux and see how each is...I'll also take a look at the results of the current poll. [addsig]

If I were you, I'd go with RedHat Linux because Mandrake isn't very good for servers in my opinion because a default mandrake installation is already very big and has a lot of services and tools running you might not need.
RedHat is very easy to configure in my opinion but it's still very powerful and can run lite.
The reason I wouldn't use Windows is that if you use Windows, you are putting security into Microsofts hands. If there's a bug, you have to wait for a bug-fix written by them and that fix will prolly cost you. Or you'll have to buy a new service-pac etc, etc.
By using an open-source-os, you can benefit from volunter open-source-developers and get free patches of high quality + you know exactly what's inside.
fabs

If you choose Linux I'd take Debian ... ok , for a Linux beginner it may be hard at the beginning , but it's really better than any RH or RH based Linux .
Up to you ... only a suggestion ...
[addsig]

yeah, debian is prolly first choice for a server but it's really not as easy to install as rh and I basically suggested rh because if you come from mandrake, you wont find rh THAT much harder. But, yeah, debian is first choice.
fabs

hm ... but all PC magazines say that Mdk 8.0 is the fastest and easiest (best) Linux distro for a server nowadays ...
[addsig]

If the most important thing for you is to get maximum value for your money, and to have lots of fun in the process, then choose Linux.
{Hackers/Programmers' definition of fun equals exhilirating stress!}

If the most important thing is to get your server up and running with minimal fuss and to save your time, use WIn2k.

As for security, methinks all you have to do is to be on the prowl for regular 'service packs'. Being at the mercy of Microsoft security-wise is not so bad - you can hardly do better than them, anyway!

[ This Message was edited by: seunosewa on 2002-04-01 01:49 ]

personally for a server I would go linux, and learn, learnings always fun, but If you lazy, Windows would be a very good option, but it cost a bit more.

I think that's a big point for us young programmers, since not all of us have a job and enough money to get windows. Maybe Linux is the better solution for a sever sitting in the corner and humming silently all the night
[addsig]

I don't think Twintop meant to put up a professional server for some company or something... And btw, as that post is quite old, he's had quite some time to set it up... . So I don't think the "time" argument for win2k is valid from that perspective.

[ This Message was edited by: Peter on 2002-04-01 18:16 ]

If you goin to pay for the OS, why not get Mac OS for your server.
Just a suggestion
(-:

i know that mandr. is full of holes. but i guess win2k has more of them...

get debian gnu/linux, solaris or FreeBSD and you have a rock stable and secure sys
[addsig]

What about OpenBSD? According to some independent reviews, it's suppose to be the most secure BSD variant (and free Unix clone).

I'm not sure about this, bu wasn't it FreeBSD? I dunno, I though I've heard that somewhere before.
[addsig]

It was OpenBSD.

(Note: FreeBSD is known to be the "desktop BSD")

(Note: That's how you can increase your posts ) [addsig]

(Note: Sure )

(Note: this also is a cool way to discuss things )
[addsig]