Originally Posted by tripy

I agree, the problem was not linux. The problem was that the hardware in the server was not supported by the distros (at that time, it surely have changed now, but as I'm only a programmer there, I don't know much of the dba worries) approved by oracle.

And this is why Windows is ultimately cheaper than Linux in business use. If you need a piece of software, 99 % certainty it runs on Windows. Maybe 40 % for Mac and 15 % for Linux. Want a developer because your out of the box software isn't quite right? In Windows environment, do you want a COM+ developer, a .NET developer, would you like managed or unmanaged C++, et cetera. If you need a Linux developer, finding someone to change your PHP is easy but making changes to a system you bought means a much smaller supply of laborers. Or massive amounts of training for your programmer staff. Windows knowledge is ubiquitous.

No matter how much people like to say otherwise, things make sense in Windows. Everything has some level of consistency. A person who knows Word also knows how to use Excel even before they ever look at it. The same concepts apply from the operating system level out through the millions of applications that are available for it. There are other platforms that are better than Windows in some niche way, but all things considered a person really does have to admit Windows really is better for the average user.

For example, Linux is better than Windows at coming with the source code. How many users of each platform care? The less than 1 % of them who write intensive applications. The rest of us, I don't want to look at the 50 million lines of C++ code that makes up my kernel. I just want it to work so I can use my computer to do the things I'm interested in. Mac is better than Windows at costing more for the entire package (overpriced hardware) and for having a snob factor. Like how a Porsche is better at going 200 mph than a Toyota, but the speed limit is 65.

John, I disagree. Your looking at it from a desktop standpoint and some servers. If a server is made fto run Windows of course it's going to run better on Windows. But not all are made for Windows. There a a ton of servers made by Sun, HP, IBM, etc. that run better on Linux or Solaris than Windows hands down.

You can develop on a Windows desktop an application that runs on a Linux or Unix server. Those applications can then be ran on windows desktops. The web and intranets are full of them.

It's not a "niche way". I know for a fact that there is a lot of enterprise software that runs a hell of a lot better on Linux or Unix than Windows.

Not everyone is using .NET. Java is still big and runs on Linux servers and is programmed using a Windows desktop.

Windows server is excellent for some software, especially on a company intranet. But I have supported a site that has 80,000 concurrent users, I wouldn't want that to be run on Windows server

Originally Posted by joder

You can develop on a Windows desktop an application that runs on a Linux or Unix server. Those applications can then be ran on windows desktops. The web and intranets are full of them.

And project mono means people who will only write .net code can target the Windows desktop, but those application can be run on Linux. Or other environments when it's finished. Although desktop software is shrinking to a niche...

Originally Posted by joder

I know for a fact that there is a lot of enterprise software that runs a hell of a lot better on Linux or Unix than Windows.

Oracle is toying with making their own Linux kernal. They'll probably leave out most of the code - no graphics support, very limited networking, no codecs - with only what a database server needs, and no overhead. When you look at the 400 to 600 threads running on your Windows desktop at any given time, that's a powerful advantage if Oracle decides to do it.

Originally Posted by joder

Windows server is excellent for some software, especially on a company intranet. But I have supported a site that has 80,000 concurrent users, I wouldn't want that to be run on Windows server

Why not? The company I work for has an ecommerce catalogue site that serves 200,000 unique visitors an hour. It's hosted on a full Windows suite: Server 03, SQL 05, Great Plains, Super Cache... We have to drag people through the nose to the site, but running all Microsoft isn't at all an impediment.

Now, Windows isn't the only solution just because a lot of people run it on their desktop. But it's not at all a bad solution. And these days all of the operating systems are getting more and more similar. Even the hardware they run on is converging.

Doesn´t linux have reboots?