PDA

View Full Version : Your thoughts on Linux


locosway
06-06-2010, 9:38 PM
Well, I've been using Linux at home for 10 years now. Because of my playing with Linux early on I've held several nice paying jobs supporting the Linux OS. I must say, I'm very fond of the Linux OS as a whole and have converted a few family members over to it.

So, what do you think of Linux?

thevic
06-06-2010, 9:46 PM
been awhile since i used linux, but i loved suse

johnthomas
06-06-2010, 10:03 PM
Years ago I tried it, didn't like it. My computer life started with windows. Kind of like an evil sister, gives you problems, does things you don't like, but hey, she is still your sister. Thru the years and different windows programs it has been a love hate relationship.

maverickmage
06-06-2010, 10:09 PM
I used to use Slackware and Gentoo (lol I was a stickler for punishment). But in the end reverted back to Windows because of 1 reason.

I want to play games. It was too much of a hassle to dual boot also since it required me to reboot everytime I wanted to play some games for a bit.

mousegun
06-06-2010, 10:10 PM
Run Linux on an SSH accessible workstation and two servers (NAS, VPN, proxy, etc.) in the garage and via liveUSB device on my notebook. Two of the kids have run Linux on their desktops, and run it occasionally now from liveUSB devices. The proxy/NAS servers support a hybrid network (fast ethernet wired, WIFI) with five Windows clients, two Win/Linux clients.

Only reason we're not 100% Linux is requirements of school or law practice. Windows is mainly a legacy issue now.

Present dominant distro is PCLinuxOS. Have used Gentoo, Knoppix and SuSE.

Think I like it?

7x57
06-06-2010, 10:10 PM
What's Microsoft? Sounds like a social disease. ;)

7x57

locosway
06-06-2010, 10:13 PM
What's Microsoft? Sounds like a social disease. ;)

7x57

It's a form of ED

locosway
06-06-2010, 10:14 PM
I used to use Slackware and Gentoo (lol I was a stickler for punishment). But in the end reverted back to Windows because of 1 reason.

I want to play games. It was too much of a hassle to dual boot also since it required me to reboot everytime I wanted to play some games for a bit.

Look into Wine and Cedega.

nick
06-06-2010, 10:23 PM
I work with various Linux/UNIX distros, various Windows versions, Solaris, Mac OS X, etc. For all the promise (and that promise has been around for decades now), there're still different roles for different operating systems. I'm not likely to have Linux on my personal workstation anytime soon (haven't found one that would work for me), but I usually have a Linux or BSD VM running for work and for those things I can't do with Windows.

As for the cost of Microsoft software, it's not an issue for me, as I'm a Microsoft registered partner, so I get most of their software (more than I use, anyway) for $300/year with the Action Pack.

Mac OS X never really grew on me. I was quite excited when it was first introduced (a UNIX with a nice GUI and decent enough developer community), but the "UNIX" part turned out to be quite limited and locked down.

As for the Windows vs. Linux debate, people will likely use whatever they use at work. "Converting" them is likely to be counterproductive, if what they use at work doesn't match what they use at home. They probably won't thank you for it, and that's what zealots do, anyway :)

leelaw
06-06-2010, 10:49 PM
I installed Ubuntu 10.04 on my netbook and it runs very well. I will not go back to Windows 7 on my netbook. Then again, I would not install a Linux distribution as a primary OS on my desktop.

I've dabbled with various Linux distributions since Redhat 4.7, but the latest Ubuntu versions really seem like a home-run, at least for my application.

Satex
06-06-2010, 11:16 PM
I use Linux on all our servers but one. Use Windows on personal computers.

tacticalcity
06-06-2010, 11:39 PM
None of the programs I need are available for it, and the knockoff versions that are just don't get the job done. So while it is a nice OS, its just not very practical. In a pure office enviorment, where word processing, email and the net are all you need, its a great affordable alternative. If you need specific applications...not so much. As far as servers go, its nice provided you are not planning on taking advantage of Windows Domain type security. Given a choice I would want to impliment it at our office, and manage the user access to resources more closely. Sadly, I've been overruled.

I do keep a Knoppix disc handy just for the heck of it. Fun learning tool.

fd15k
06-06-2010, 11:39 PM
Linux is good in theory - direct democracy. I prefer a republic - FreeBSD.

subrosa
06-06-2010, 11:57 PM
...in a way Linux pays for my guns, so how can I not like it? (Linux/Unix sysadmin ;) )

Grumpyoldretiredcop
06-07-2010, 12:08 AM
You forgot an option...

"Fun and fast, but sometimes frustrating." :D

I dual-boot on my work laptop because some of my required software doesn't like Linux so well. Same reason, I don't have it on my home desktop.

maverickmage
06-07-2010, 12:29 AM
Look into Wine and Cedega.

I did. But I didn't want to pay for those programs and it didn't support a lot of the games that I played.

Canute
06-07-2010, 12:32 AM
I started using Linux in 1994. I actually downloaded my first distribution in fall '93. It just took that long to figure out WTF and get a working installation. Things were much harder back then.
I have basically been all linux all the time since then. Even work has mostly allowed me to use Linux most of the time.
I have a Linux email/web server, a laptop, a router I built myself (Soekris with a T1), a netbook in the garage, and two Android devices :).
A mechanic friend of mine has been complaining about WGA, etc. on Windows so I finally pointed him to Ubuntu 10. He's not particularly computer savvy but he's mechanical and I think he's enjoying the learning curve.

locosway
06-07-2010, 6:32 AM
None of the programs I need are available for it, and the knockoff versions that are just don't get the job done. So while it is a nice OS, its just not very practical. In a pure office enviorment, where word processing, email and the net are all you need, its a great affordable alternative. If you need specific applications...not so much. As far as servers go, its nice provided you are not planning on taking advantage of Windows Domain type security. Given a choice I would want to impliment it at our office, and manage the user access to resources more closely. Sadly, I've been overruled.

I do keep a Knoppix disc handy just for the heck of it. Fun learning tool.

Linux can do domain duties.

nick
06-07-2010, 10:31 AM
Linux can do domain duties.

Gotta add a qualifier here. Yes, there're LDAP directories available for Linux. However, "can do" in Linux isn't the same as, say, in Microsoft, Sun, etc. products. With those, a supported feature means that it's been tested, it's quite likely to work, and if it doesn't, there's normally support available, several levels of it (from moronic first level to pretty good 3rd and 4th levels), and when you need it. With Linux and community-supported applications, it's a bit more dicey. The applications usually come with a lot of potential and features, provided you write half of it yourself in the course of deployment. The adherence to standards depends on whether the people who wrote the app felt anti-establishment at the time, if they were writing the app for their particular system or network (with the idea that if someone needs it for a different kind of network, well, he can then rewrite it to fit that network, right?), other such qualifiers. The same goes for support - if you're lucky, you'll get to work with someone who wrote the app you need support for, and can slip in a few improvements and new features you want while fixing the issue you have. If you're not lucky, you'll be dealing with a forum where the average time between posts is measured in months or years, and the posts are usually of the "I have this problem too, did you guys figure it out" kind.

So, while Linux is very good where customizing the OS and applications is a requirement, it doesn't shine where adherence to standards out of the box is needed. To give an example, if I'm building a network/systems for a new client every month, each client with different requirements, apps, etc., I won't go with something unpredictable there. I'll go with something that I know works in a certain way and fits the bill (and unlikely, not impossible, but unlikely) to cause me unexpected issues which would delay the project and be a deal-breaker. Cisco/Microsoft would usually be prominent there, as will many other similar vendors be.

However, if I need something customizable, where the client's requirements allow for the time to do the customization, or I'm building an appliance that many clients will use, that's where Linux and Linux apps would be my choice.

As for the price, to most companies I work with software cost is only one of the many parts of a project, and it's usually not the greatest cost (labor usually is), and not the most important one (bringing the project to completion sooner allows them to make much more money than they'd save on software). The cost of support also usually matters less than the speed and reliability of support.

locosway
06-07-2010, 11:01 AM
Funny, every Windows domains I've worked on, there's always some feature that's supposed to work that doesn't.

Also like to add, Windows doesn't follow standards, it follows it's own protocols. Always has. If you want a standard, then you would run something that's based on open IEEE or other standards.

Besides, if you're paying someone $80k to manage a server farm or something, why not pay them to make your network work how you want it, instead of everyone else conforming to the network?

bigmike82
06-07-2010, 4:46 PM
"Besides, if you're paying someone $80k to manage a server farm or something, why not pay them to make your network work how you want it, instead of everyone else conforming to the network?"
9 times out of 10, Windows AD fits that bill *way* better than the Linux equivalents.

"Funny, every Windows domains I've worked on, there's always some feature that's supposed to work that doesn't."
Examples?

danito
06-07-2010, 5:40 PM
Back in the very early 90's I had the great fortune or miss fortune (depending on how you look at it) of working with SCO Unix, this was before they tried to sue everyone and their brothers for Linux patent rights (but that another story) At any rate back in the day SCO Unix was a true system five Unix variant that would run on Intel processors which made it very cost effective when compared to other System Five Unix variants such Sparc Solaris systems (Good, Bad or indifferent BSD is a whole different animal) That experience was useful in adopting Linux a few years later. I stay true to my roots and prefer the Fedora distro.

As an IT professional I believe in the right tool for the right job. Linux has its place, it’s great for things like SMTP and HTTP applications and other internet services that require adherence to RFC standards. Windows is great for directory services and delivery of end user applications. To each his own

juicemansam
06-07-2010, 6:33 PM
I've used Linux since the '94. I've only held one IT position since then, which was a Computer Tech position for a school district. The district was very anti-Linux and very pro-Winders. I was left to my own devices, no training on their techniques or protocols, only who's who and where's half of the equipment. Luckly for me I had Linux on my side. Linux got me threw the year, and never let me down, including when I had to clone whole computer labs. I know their pro-Winders side had to do with budgets and having to spend the money or lose it next year, but they could have spent a bit less on software and a bit more on technicians (I was covering 4 schools when everybody else had one or two). Woohoo Linux! Oh, and it's what I use on my PC. I only emulate Winders if I need to test something before I install it on my brothers' computers, and teh only time I touch Winders is when I service the PCs.

advocatusdiaboli
06-07-2010, 7:16 PM
I've always had some Linux running somewhere, whether in a router, firewall, proxy server, or file/music/web server.We use Linux in a file/web server and I run a few VMs on my Desktop (8-core OS X Leopard UNIX) for testing sometimes. We mostly "use" OS X UNIX at home--it does everything my wife and daughters would do with Windows and more and much of it for free and with near-zero risk of viruses unlike Windows and it does the heavy lifting I need in After-effects, Modo, Photoshop, and Final Cut Studio--can't get those on Linux.

We use UNIX because I have to maintain all the systems so Ssh and Rsync are my friends. I consider it an evolved Linux by way of BSD UNIX.

Unlike some others, I have found OS X not to be locked down at all and as a former Sun systems engineer, I can tell you it's open. Just about everything that runs on Linux is ported to OS X through Macports even using GTK and X-11. The only Windows in our house is a Vista-64 game machine and a Window 7 and XP virtual machine--all three are used very rarely any more.

JDay
06-07-2010, 9:36 PM
I used to use Slackware and Gentoo (lol I was a stickler for punishment).

Both of those work quite well if you know what you're doing. With Gentoo all you have to do is make sure you're running off the stable branch and make proper use of /etc/portage/portage.*. Slackware has a binary package system now so its much simpler than it used to be.

JDay
06-07-2010, 9:42 PM
As far as servers go, its nice provided you are not planning on taking advantage of Windows Domain type security.

Not true at all, for one thing you can use kerberos for secure authentication.

http://web.mit.edu/Kerberos/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kerberos_%28protocol%29

I forgot about LDAP.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LDAP

nick
06-07-2010, 9:44 PM
Funny, every Windows domains I've worked on, there's always some feature that's supposed to work that doesn't.

Sometimes that's due to an actual bug (there're quite a few, of course). However, in most of the cases I've dealt with it was due to the person in charge of configuring it not knowing what he was doing. Since I'm usually called in when a company's IT couldn't deal with something, I've seen quite a lot of that.

Also like to add, Windows doesn't follow standards, it follows it's own protocols. Always has. If you want a standard, then you would run something that's based on open IEEE or other standards.

They often diverge in their implementations (like most other vendors). However, that's the stereotype that's kinda old and outdated. They've changed their ways starting with Windows 2000, and got better since then.

To add to that, what's more of a standard, something that's used by 20% of the systems, or by 80%? :)

Besides, if you're paying someone $80k to manage a server farm or something, why not pay them to make your network work how you want it, instead of everyone else conforming to the network?

Because many companies, Microsoft included, have most features most companies want out-of-the-box, and because you don't want that farm to be a personal fiefdom of an irreplaceable IT guy, that with all the often unnecessary customizations he's introduced (which cause issues if you remove them though).

A client of mine got itself talked into a custom database engine (yeah, a custom database engine). There were few enough people who knew how to program it to begin with, fewer still working for this company. The makes of the said database engine went out of business, and my client was at the mercy of two people for whom it was a side job (they had regular jobs, as well, and those took precedence). It took quite an effort (and some padding of my savings account, as well as those of a few other people) to move them to MS SQL 2005. For which there're plenty of support people, DBAs, etc., not to mention Microsoft itself :)

There.

JDay
06-07-2010, 9:45 PM
I did. But I didn't want to pay for those programs and it didn't support a lot of the games that I played.

WINE is free and supports a lot more than you might think, just because a program isn't listed doesn't mean it wont run.

http://appdb.winehq.org/

JDay
06-07-2010, 9:50 PM
The same goes for support - if you're lucky, you'll get to work with someone who wrote the app you need support for, and can slip in a few improvements and new features you want while fixing the issue you have. If you're not lucky, you'll be dealing with a forum where the average time between posts is measured in months or years, and the posts are usually of the "I have this problem too, did you guys figure it out" kind.

That's why we have the Freenode IRC network, you can speak to the devs on there.

http://freenode.net/

Then there's the commercial Linux distributions such as Redhat that have professional support packages.

nick
06-07-2010, 9:53 PM
As an IT professional I believe in the right tool for the right job. Linux has its place, it’s great for things like SMTP and HTTP applications and other internet services that require adherence to RFC standards. Windows is great for directory services and delivery of end user applications. To each his own

Exactly. One picks the right tool for the job, not try to fit the job to the tool. Hence the Windows vs. Linux/UNIX, Mac OS vs. Windows, other such debates are quite pointless. And if one wants to be employable, he better know them all well enough to be in a position to pick the right tool for the job, rather than try to fit the job to the only (or the few) tools he knows.

locosway
06-07-2010, 9:55 PM
There.

80% of systems run Windows? Not quite...

I've worked in web hosting for 5 years, and to be honest, there's rarely ever a Windows machine anywhere.

As for corporate, yeah, there's a lot of Windows, but there's also a lot of Linux now as well. File servers, print servers, and anything else that doesn't require in depth knowledge of Linux has popped up.

JDay
06-07-2010, 9:55 PM
I know their pro-Winders side had to do with budgets and having to spend the money or lose it next year, but they could have spent a bit less on software and a bit more on technicians

Or they could quit spending taxpayer money just to spend it, this is one of the main reasons the states economy is in such bad shape.

KillZone45
06-07-2010, 9:56 PM
Well, I've been using Linux at home for 10 years now. Because of my playing with Linux early on I've held several nice paying jobs supporting the Linux OS. I must say, I'm very fond of the Linux OS as a whole and have converted a few family members over to it.

So, what do you think of Linux?

I think you should be my mentor for Linux, would love to have a professional help me with the Linux OS!

locosway
06-07-2010, 9:57 PM
I think you should be my mentor for Linux, would love to have a professional help me with the Linux OS!

Shoot me a message anytime with questions.

nick
06-07-2010, 9:58 PM
Then there's the commercial Linux distributions such as Redhat that have professional support packages.

Yup, and that's why RedHat's gaining ground.

JDay
06-07-2010, 10:05 PM
To add to that, what's more of a standard, something that's used by 20% of the systems, or by 80%?

Most servers run some variety of Unix, Windows is in the minority here.

Because many companies, Microsoft included, have most features most companies want out-of-the-box, and because you don't want that farm to be a personal fiefdom of an irreplaceable IT guy, that with all the often unnecessary customizations he's introduced (which cause issues if you remove them though).

Windows server farm? Don't make me laugh, there's a reason you don't see Windows running on any system in the top 500 list.

http://www.top500.org/list/2010/06/100

A client of mine got itself talked into a custom database engine (yeah, a custom database engine). There were few enough people who knew how to program it to begin with, fewer still working for this company. The makes of the said database engine went out of business, and my client was at the mercy of two people for whom it was a side job (they had regular jobs, as well, and those took precedence). It took quite an effort (and some padding of my savings account, as well as those of a few other people) to move them to MS SQL 2005. For which there're plenty of support people, DBAs, etc., not to mention Microsoft itself

And then there's MySQL and PostgreSQL, both of which can easily replace MS SQL and perform much faster. There is also no shortage of IT staff who know how to implement these.

http://www.mysql.com/?bydis_dis_index=1

http://www.postgresql.org/

HUTCH 7.62
06-07-2010, 10:10 PM
What the hell in Linux? you guys are Nerds

nick
06-07-2010, 10:10 PM
80% of systems run Windows? Not quite...

I've worked in web hosting for 5 years, and to be honest, there's rarely ever a Windows machine anywhere.

As for corporate, yeah, there's a lot of Windows, but there's also a lot of Linux now as well. File servers, print servers, and anything else that doesn't require in depth knowledge of Linux has popped up.

I was throwing numbers to illustrate a point, not to give accurate statistics. I hope you're not claiming Linux to be more common than Windows yet :)

Web hosting, I've seen enough of both. Linux has its strong sides there, as does Windows. Some of the companies I worked with ran their sites on Windows, some on Linux/UNIX, some on both (those last ones were always a PITA :)).

Most of the companies I've worked with also had at least a few Linux/UNIX boxes, just like you indicated, even the all/mostly Microsoft shops.

Like I said, one chooses the best tool for the job.

On my laptop I run Windows 7 with FreeBSD 8, Solaris 2009.06 (yes, it's a new laptop :)), Windows 2008 R2, and Windows 2003 R2 VMs.

locosway
06-07-2010, 10:12 PM
I agree, best tool for the job. I just hate it when people say "Well, you can only do that on Windows", when clearly that's not true.

Besides, any serious network or mission critical server I've worked on has been Linux/Unix. Never once have I seen a server that absolutely could not be down running Windows.

JDay
06-07-2010, 10:13 PM
I agree, best tool for the job. I just hate it when people say "Well, you can only do that on Windows", when clearly that's not true.

I like the reaction I get when I prove them wrong.

locosway
06-07-2010, 10:15 PM
I like the reaction I get when I prove them wrong.

Same here, unfortunately I'm moving out of Linux Admin stuff. Going back to school.

nick
06-07-2010, 10:25 PM
Most servers run some variety of Unix, Windows is in the minority here.

I'm sure you have something to base it on. This hasn't been my experience though, and I've worked with probably about 150-170 different mid-to-large size companies in quite a few industries in the last 5-6 years.

Windows server farm? Don't make me laugh, there's a reason you don't see Windows running on any system in the top 500 list.

http://www.top500.org/list/2010/06/100

Well, you're being a zealot here :) As for the major sites running on Windows, there's always Myspace.

I won't even bother to comment on the "you don't see Windows running on any system in the top 500 list".

And then there's MySQL and PostgreSQL, both of which can easily replace MS SQL and perform much faster. There is also no shortage of IT staff who know how to implement these.

http://www.mysql.com/?bydis_dis_index=1

http://www.postgresql.org/

No, they can't, and they don't. I work with both on a daily basis (some of the systems in my company use them), and they're a PITA to integrate with (the drivers for them aren't readily available, and those that are available aren't the best performers), and have quite a few quirks that a mature software package shouldn't have. The reason we use them is cost, or rather, the vendors for some of the systems picked them because of the cost reasons.

The featureset of both MySQL and PostgreSQL is quite poor compared to MS SQL 2005, much less 2008. Some of the things that were standard in MS SQL 7 were only implemented in MySQL about 3 years ago, and weren't implemented in PostgreSQL at all.

The downside of MS SQL 2005/2008 is the high initial hardware requirements (MySQL and PostgreSQL have much lower entry-level hardware requirements). However, with the same more advanced hardware setup, MS SQL 2005/2008 outperforms both MySQL and PostgreSQL, both due to a better engine design, a better implementation of SQL (basically, it allows you to query data in a way that's less resource-heavy, which options don't yet exist in MySQl or PostgreSQL), and the implementation of stored procedures, which took MySQl a while to add to its engine, and they're still not as optimizable there.

Out of the two, I'd pick MySQL, it's more mature than PostgreSQL (and I'm frankly tired of the limitations of PostgreSQL. I often have to write a few lines of code where a simple statement could be used in MS SQL).

....

nick
06-07-2010, 10:29 PM
I agree, best tool for the job. I just hate it when people say "Well, you can only do that on Windows", when clearly that's not true.

Besides, any serious network or mission critical server I've worked on has been Linux/Unix. Never once have I seen a server that absolutely could not be down running Windows.

I have. They're usually clustered though.

I've seen both Linux/UNIX and Windows servers go down, as well as stay up for a long time. It's all a matter of how you configure them, what applications you run on them, and how heavily they're used.

For example. I've run high performance (as in hundreds of thousands to millions messages per hour) mailers on both Windows 2003 and RedHat 5.something. Both worked fine, once the quirks were worked out (and most of the quirks were with the application to begin with).

locosway
06-07-2010, 10:29 PM
Myspace is written in CFM, so let's not even go there...

As for SQL, ever wonder why people pick Oracle over MS? Ever read how Post can run as fast as Oracle?

As for efficient queries... Maybe you're used to clicking through your queries, but usually if there's an issue with overhead of a query it's from a badly written sql query.

nick
06-07-2010, 10:32 PM
I like the reaction I get when I prove them wrong.

Well, that's just silly :)

nick
06-07-2010, 10:38 PM
Myspace is written in CFM, so let's not even go there...

As for SQL, ever wonder why people pick Oracle over MS? Ever read how Post can run as fast as Oracle?

As for efficient queries... Maybe you're used to clicking through your queries, but usually if there's an issue with overhead of a query it's from a badly written sql query.

Umm, I don't "click through" my queries. Let's not try to dismiss a point by denigrating the person who makes it :) I've been optimizing queries for well over a decade. One of the ways I've been doing it was through running them as stored procedures. That's something that took a while to find its way to MySQL.

As for Oracle, I used to like it a lot (especially pre-SQL 2005), if not their business practices. I actually started using it before MS SQL (especially since it was POS pre-2000, and 200 was only passable). However, MS SQL's comparative quality went seriously up with 2005, and Oracle's hasn't improved all that much. A lot of big companies still use it (and will continue using it, for many reasons, not all of which have to do with performance), but many that wouldn't even look towards MS SQL before are now adopting it.

nick
06-07-2010, 10:41 PM
Oh, and MySpace has been running on .NET (with only some legacy ColdFusion code) for a while now, ever since they went through one of their "infrastructure revolutions" 2 or 3 years ago. They're about to go through another one, by the way, they've outgrown their infrastructure again, and they need more of it to start making money on something other than PPC.

bigmike82
06-08-2010, 12:04 AM
"Don't make me laugh, there's a reason you don't see Windows running on any system in the top 500 list."

Care to retract that? There's actually 5. Yeah, it's 1%, but it pretty much shoots the point that Windows can't run on super computers out of the water.

KillZone45
06-08-2010, 1:43 AM
Shoot me a message anytime with questions.

What is the best way to get to be familiar with the Linux OS? I wouldn't mind being proficient enough to be a sysadmin.

nick
06-08-2010, 1:48 AM
"Don't make me laugh, there's a reason you don't see Windows running on any system in the top 500 list."

Care to retract that? There's actually 5. Yeah, it's 1%, but it pretty much shoots the point that Windows can't run on super computers out of the water.

Moreover, not being an OS of choice for supercomputers is kinda irrelevant to it being an OS of choice for many other applications. To the best of my knowledge, my clients aren't running supercomputers :)

nick
06-08-2010, 1:50 AM
What is the best way to get to be familiar with the Linux OS? I wouldn't mind being proficient enough to be a sysadmin.

A good book on the basics would be a good start. Most of such books that actually get published are good enough for the purpose.

This will also give you the idea on how to continue after that.

Many community colleges also offer various Linux courses, but the quality of instruction is often subpar. However, if you're lucky with your professor, you can learn a lot, and community colleges still have some good professors. Just do your research.

I might have some e-books on the subject. Let me know if you're interested, and I'll look them up. What level are you at when it comes to IT?

bigmike82
06-08-2010, 8:06 AM
Most books are very meh.

I have to actually play with the software more so than just reading the books. To that end, one of the best books I've seen on the topic is a book teaching you FreeBSD by having you configure and install a large suite of common server applications. I can't find the damn title and I don't see it on my bookshelf at the moment...if I find it, I'll shoot you the title.

Yes, FreeBSD isn't Linux, but it's a great OS for most server applications nonetheless.

There we go!

http://www.amazon.com/Building-Internet-Server-FreeBSD-6/dp/1411695747/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1276009671&sr=8-1

A bit outdated at this point, though still a good intro.

http://www.amazon.com/Building-Server-FreeBSD-Bryan-Hong/dp/159327145X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1276009810&sr=1-1

There's a slightly newer one.

locosway
06-08-2010, 8:15 AM
If you want to be a sysadmin you need to know more than just Linux. You also need a basic understanding of programming and various scripting languages. Then, depending on what you admin, such as web servers, you'll need to know basic html, php, and so on. It also wouldn't hurt to know ruby and python.

Many companies want you to have a 4 year degree in some sort of computer field if you're going to be an admin. I'm self taught, and now with the economy the way it is, it's very hard getting a job. This is why I'm going back to school now.

danito
06-08-2010, 9:11 AM
Jack of all trades master of none, keep your skills current and you will stay employed my friend (Cisco, Windows, VMware, *nix, scripting, networking are good things to be proficient in)

The whole Linux vs. windows debate is pointless. Use the right tool for the job given the current circumstances. Personal bias will not keep you employed. I have a love hate relationship with both Microsoft and Linux. I have been in the IT profession for almost 16 years now and it was not what I went to college to learn. I have an applied science degree in manufacturing and design, I learned my IT skills through hands on practice and necessity, sink or swim)

JDay
06-08-2010, 10:43 AM
Yes, FreeBSD isn't Linux, but it's a great OS for most server applications nonetheless.

Gentoo Linux, the best of both worlds.

7x57
06-09-2010, 9:32 PM
Windows server farm? Don't make me laugh, there's a reason you don't see Windows running on any system in the top 500 list.

http://www.top500.org/list/2010/06/100


Um...nothing on Top500 is a server farm.

7x57

7x57
06-09-2010, 9:42 PM
To add to that, what's more of a standard, something that's used by 20% of the systems, or by 80%?


Ah, yes, it always comes down to the Gates rules:

1. Microsoft is more standards-compliant.

2. The standard is whatever Microsoft does.

3. The standard (meaning whatever the behavior of the currently shipping product is) will be changed as often as necessary to ensure that reverse-engineering the behavior bug-for-bug is an endless treadmill, ensuring the truth of #1.

Far be it from me to complain about such a doubleplusgood OS!

7x57

KillZone45
06-10-2010, 12:20 AM
What level are you at when it comes to IT?

Just beginning, I took a few classes on Linux and didn't like it. But I would love to learn more, I know that if you have a decent enough understanding that you can get a good paying job with it. I feel that I havent given it a chance and would like to learn more.

nick
06-10-2010, 12:29 AM
Ah, yes, it always comes down to the Gates rules:

1. Microsoft is more standards-compliant.

2. The standard is whatever Microsoft does.

3. The standard (meaning whatever the behavior of the currently shipping product is) will be changed as often as necessary to ensure that reverse-engineering the behavior bug-for-bug is an endless treadmill, ensuring the truth of #1.

Far be it from me to complain about such a doubleplusgood OS!

7x57

Fair or not, that's what one has to integrate with in most companies I dealt with.

nick
06-10-2010, 12:30 AM
Just beginning, I took a few classes on Linux and didn't like it. But I would love to learn more, I know that if you have a decent enough understanding that you can get a good paying job with it. I feel that I havent given it a chance and would like to learn more.

If you're looking into this as an occupation, you might want to start with fundamentals of networking before learning Linux or any other OS.

Sinixstar
06-10-2010, 1:08 AM
I look at the Windows/*Nix/Apple debate as kind of futile.

Whatever works for you, and makes you comfortable. I deal mostly in windows. Why? Because it works for me. It's what i've used for years by default - and it's what I have to do most of my work in. If i'm doing my job - the end user has no idea what kind of computer i was working on, or what kind of computer my code is running on. If I switched - it would be an exercise in pure ego stroking.

Sinixstar
06-10-2010, 1:16 AM
Ah, yes, it always comes down to the Gates rules:

1. Microsoft is more standards-compliant.

2. The standard is whatever Microsoft does.

3. The standard (meaning whatever the behavior of the currently shipping product is) will be changed as often as necessary to ensure that reverse-engineering the behavior bug-for-bug is an endless treadmill, ensuring the truth of #1.

Far be it from me to complain about such a doubleplusgood OS!

7x57

Standards are a funny thing...

Back when IE3 was released, and Microsoft introduced the Microsoft.XMLHTTP object for IE. They did this so you could incorporate something called "Data Islands". Everybody went absolutely bonkers. They jumped up and down screaming about how this was against the "standards" and a violation of "standard security practices" and so on and so forth. Microsoft got severely roasted as a result. That was in the mid/late 90s?

Jump forward to 2004/2005 - and a lot of people are patting themselves on the back over this revolutionary things called "AJAX". It takes advantage of an object that microsoft introduced a bunch of years previously called "XMLHTTP". It allows the browser to reach out an asynchronously read XML and update only chunks of data on a page. Web2.0 is born...

Or - then there's the debate about Javascript 2.0.
For years, people have been complaining that Microsoft didn't want to follow the "standards" of getting "getters" and "setters" in their development platforms. In the discussions about the future of javascript - microsoft holds everybody's feet to the fire about using getters and setters as common interfaces, and "everybody" again goes bonkers. Scoffing at microsoft's attempts to control the standards process. After microsoft spent years trying to get their platforms in line with what everybody has been pushing for, Microsoft have the NERVE to ask everybody else to adhere to the same standards.


In short - the "standards" argument is stupid. If everybody followed the "standards" - there would be no progress. It takes somebody to break out of the acceptable mold and do something new for there to be any progress. Nevermind that the Microsoft as the evil empire sentiment just doesn't hold water....

nemisis1400
06-10-2010, 11:15 AM
Initially, i got Linux/Ubuntu because i wanted something that allows to run video files smoothly without glitches and errors. I found out that it's just the hardware that's not sufficient to run anything. Still haven't upgraded, but still running Ubuntu because the load time is faster, I don't worry about viruses, and my computer doesn't sound like it's about to die whenever it's on.

Oh and where is the i only have one computer running linux option? still have a netbook running windows since there's no way to use a backup cd.

7x57
06-10-2010, 4:20 PM
Fair or not, that's what one has to integrate with in most companies I dealt with.

Oh, sure, hide behind making a living, serving the customer, and all that. Whatareya, some kinda business-friendly conservative? ;)

7x57

ocabj
06-11-2010, 9:19 AM
Without giving out detailed information on our infrastructure, I can tell you that while we abhor deploying Windows as a server platform, we have been 'forced' to for specific situations due to application requirements for other departments on campus.

Though our policy is to not run Windows on baremetal servers, and favor virtualization.

Most of our infrastructure is Unix (not Linux).

P1X4R
06-12-2010, 7:18 AM
i'm finally upgrading my old Linux workstation of 8 years. it has served my purposes extremely well.

cat /etc/redhat-release
Red Hat Linux release 9 (Shrike)

i downloaded Fedora Core 13 so i'll be up to date on packages/libraries. can't wait. should be fun. :)

Al Norris
06-13-2010, 1:45 PM
I have 3 computers at my house. None have any microsoft related software. Haven't had any since 2005.

While suse 11.2 is the main OS used, I am currently experimenting with the latest ubuntu. I rather like it. My wife still prefers suse/KDE (her prior computer was an XP box). So I understand her reluctance to shift to gnome.

Regardless, it has just been easier to maintain our computers with linux than with anything I have experienced with MS.

Invicta
06-14-2010, 12:14 PM
Well, I've been using Linux at home for 10 years now. Because of my playing with Linux early on I've held several nice paying jobs supporting the Linux OS. I must say, I'm very fond of the Linux OS as a whole and have converted a few family members over to it.

So, what do you think of Linux?

Depends on what the use is. Has some good applications in the enterprise. I like it when it is bundled up in an appliance or used for a specific function. I don't like it as a general purpose OS. Windows 7 does the job quite well and when you factor in application compatibility plus the concept of plug and play, well then......

That said, I hope it continues to grow and challenge Windows. Competition will bring about better systems and new innovations.

locosway
06-14-2010, 3:12 PM
Depends on what the use is. Has some good applications in the enterprise. I like it when it is bundled up in an appliance or used for a specific function. I don't like it as a general purpose OS. Windows 7 does the job quite well and when you factor in application compatibility plus the concept of plug and play, well then......

That said, I hope it continues to grow and challenge Windows. Competition will bring about better systems and new innovations.

Funny, there are no Windows drivers for my laptop, only Linux drivers. So, I guess my situation is a little different. :D

Deadbolt
06-14-2010, 4:20 PM
Linux is great if you know what you're doing. If you dont, which you dont otherwise you wouldnt have made this thread ( :rofl: ) stick to windows or the BSD mac base

JDay
06-14-2010, 4:28 PM
Funny, there are no Windows drivers for my laptop, only Linux drivers. So, I guess my situation is a little different. :D

I find that hard to believe, what laptop is this?

JDay
06-14-2010, 4:29 PM
Linux is great if you know what you're doing. If you dont, which you dont otherwise you wouldnt have made this thread ( :rofl: ) stick to windows or the BSD mac base

You've obviously never used Ubuntu.

locosway
06-14-2010, 4:29 PM
Dell XPS M1530, it was designed for Ubuntu 9.04 and came with no Windows license. Dell has no drivers for Windows for my laptop. However, everything works with Linux. :D

JDay
06-14-2010, 5:31 PM
Dell XPS M1530, it was designed for Ubuntu 9.04 and came with no Windows license. Dell has no drivers for Windows for my laptop. However, everything works with Linux. :D

I bet if you install Windows 7 on it that all drivers will be automatically installed. The only reason Dell doesn't supply Windows drivers is because Windows is not an option on that model. They do that to save money instead of having to pay someone to keep a Windows support page updated.

In fact people have done just that, the only thing you have to do is download the latest Nvidia video drivers from the Nvidia site.

http://en.community.dell.com/support-forums/laptop/f/3518/p/19279095/19500170.aspx

locosway
06-14-2010, 5:54 PM
Nope, a lot of things don't work even with Windows 7. I was running Windows 7 when I was still playing WoW, it's a nice OS, but just doesn't do it for me.

Invicta
06-15-2010, 4:52 PM
Nope, a lot of things don't work even with Windows 7. I was running Windows 7 when I was still playing WoW, it's a nice OS, but just doesn't do it for me.

Can you clarify the "a lot of things don't work" statement?

locosway
06-15-2010, 5:12 PM
None of the buttons (multimedia keys) and there was something else, but I don't remember now.

oaklander
06-15-2010, 5:16 PM
Dual boot system now. Have used Ubuntu off and on for a long time. Starting to like it even more for doing web stuff - really fast and stable.

Invicta
06-16-2010, 12:15 AM
None of the buttons (multimedia keys) and there was something else, but I don't remember now.

Oh, ok, you are talking about the laptop that only came with Linux right? I thought you were saying "a lot of thing in Windows 7 don't work" which seemed kind of harsh.

CSDGuy
06-16-2010, 12:25 AM
Considering going dual-boot on my computer. I've got Win7 on it, and so far, it runs just fine and did an upgrade from Vista. However, every once in a while, I get this hankering to use Linux... and that's an itch that I'm going to have to eventually scratch!

Pyrodyne
06-16-2010, 12:43 AM
00:42:47 up 465 days, 16:44, 2 users, load average: 0.14, 0.09, 0.08

Enough said about that.

JDay
06-16-2010, 12:57 AM
Considering going dual-boot on my computer. I've got Win7 on it, and so far, it runs just fine and did an upgrade from Vista. However, every once in a while, I get this hankering to use Linux... and that's an itch that I'm going to have to eventually scratch!

You could always install it in a virtual machine.

danito
06-16-2010, 2:41 PM
00:42:47 up 465 days, 16:44, 2 users, load average: 0.14, 0.09, 0.08

Enough said about that.

LOL

Current OS: Microsoft Windows Server 2003, Service Pack 2, Multiprocessor Free.
Time Zone: Pacific Daylight Time

System Events as of 6/16/2010 2:39:09 PM:

Date: Time: Event: Comment:
---------- ----------- ------------------- ----------------------

Current System Uptime: 488 day(s), 19 hour(s), 59 minute(s), 45 second(s)

locosway
06-16-2010, 2:43 PM
LOL

Current OS: Microsoft Windows Server 2003, Service Pack 2, Multiprocessor Free.
Time Zone: Pacific Daylight Time

System Events as of 6/16/2010 2:39:09 PM:

Date: Time: Event: Comment:
---------- ----------- ------------------- ----------------------

Current System Uptime: 488 day(s), 19 hour(s), 59 minute(s), 45 second(s)

Sucks not being able to apply updates because of your uptime, doesn't it?

danito
06-16-2010, 2:54 PM
Sucks not being able to apply updates because of your uptime, doesn't it?

Fully Patched, and updated

What sucks about that ? ;-)

Chris M
06-16-2010, 3:02 PM
Several years ago I played around with Red Hat, Mandrake, and Suse. They weren't bad, but I didn't really spend too much time trying to learn it. Lately, I've been installing Ubuntu on a bunch of different computer, including laptops and netbooks. I really like it, and haven't had any major issues with it.

I'd like to get a second computer for home - one running linux, dedicated to web surfing and most general computer stuff, and the other running Windows, mainly for software compatibility (Wine can't run everything.)

The father of a friend of mine is a Unix/Linux guru (programming in Unix since the 70's), and has been teaching me quite a bit, lately.

Chris M
06-16-2010, 3:15 PM
Linux is great if you know what you're doing. If you dont, which you dont otherwise you wouldnt have made this thread ( :rofl: ) stick to windows or the BSD mac base

I recently gave a computer to an elderly woman that wanted a computer, but didn't know how to use one (she didn't even know how to use a mouse). I installed the latest version of Ubuntu Linux on an old 500mhz Pentium III machine I had laying around. I was surprised how fast that old machine ran.

She's had one problem with it so far. She came up to me and told me that the computer wouldn't turn on. That the screen would just say "No Signal". I told her that she's turning the monitor on, and she needs to press the power button on the computer. Other than that 'glitch', she's loving it.

It's free. It finds & installs software for you. It automatically finds plug-ins and such to make it's software compatible with what you're trying to do. There are quite a few features within Linux (Ubuntu especially) that make it ideal for newbies.

JDay
06-16-2010, 6:44 PM
Sucks not being able to apply updates because of your uptime, doesn't it?

Most times you can just log out and back in. No reboot required.

Pyrodyne
06-16-2010, 10:26 PM
LOL

Current OS: Microsoft Windows Server 2003, Service Pack 2, Multiprocessor Free.
Time Zone: Pacific Daylight Time

System Events as of 6/16/2010 2:39:09 PM:

Date: Time: Event: Comment:
---------- ----------- ------------------- ----------------------

Current System Uptime: 488 day(s), 19 hour(s), 59 minute(s), 45 second(s)

I bet you don't have drunks hitting power poles causing extended power outages either. :rolleyes:

I would wager you are running that on server hardware and not desktop hardware.

Running time on my box has been 6 years, only time it goes down is when the power is out for more than 4 hours when my batteries finally die.

sd_shooter
06-16-2010, 10:53 PM
I have a dedicated pandora player in the garage - built using Ubuntu on a broken laptop that I brought back to life.

danito
06-17-2010, 12:04 PM
I bet you don't have drunks hitting power poles causing extended power outages either. :rolleyes:

I would wager you are running that on server hardware and not desktop hardware.

Running time on my box has been 6 years, only time it goes down is when the power is out for more than 4 hours when my batteries finally die.


Your Linux uptime is awesome . Most of our wiring closets and server racks are backed up by a facilities based UPS system which is also backed up by a diesel generator so power related events are not typically an issue. In fact most of our outages are caused by our own facilities staff (lol). Itís happened a few times over the years where someone will come into the IT office after hours to clean, plug a vacum into one of the UPS circuits, there by tripping a circuit breaker causing havoc - bringing down a bunch of assorted equipment, go fig

ocabj
06-18-2010, 10:28 AM
I bet you don't have drunks hitting power poles causing extended power outages either. :rolleyes:

I would wager you are running that on server hardware and not desktop hardware.

Running time on my box has been 6 years, only time it goes down is when the power is out for more than 4 hours when my batteries finally die.

So, what facility are you using to update your kernel without a reboot?

sfwdiy
06-18-2010, 1:04 PM
If you're looking into this as an occupation, you might want to start with fundamentals of networking before learning Linux or any other OS.

+1. Sysadmin stuff is more about making computers talk to each other than it is about using one OS or another, and computers essentially all speak the same language. A thorough understanding of TCP/IP and network architecture is important.

--B

Sinixstar
06-18-2010, 9:59 PM
Myspace is written in CFM, so let's not even go there...

As for SQL, ever wonder why people pick Oracle over MS? Ever read how Post can run as fast as Oracle?

As for efficient queries... Maybe you're used to clicking through your queries, but usually if there's an issue with overhead of a query it's from a badly written sql query.

Generally speaking - a good DBA who knows what they're doing can make MSSQL run every bit as fast and stable as Oracle.

A DBA who doesn't know what they're doing can make Oracle look like a piece of junk.

Much like guns - it all comes down to the nut behind the trigger.
MSSQL has a much lower bar of entry, so there's a lot more mediocre people out there using it. Oracle has a higher bar of entry. Most Oracle DBAs are extremely well versed in the world of relational data. Their systems run better as a result. Take the same DBA - show him the ropes of an MSSQL system - and he'll make the same magic happen.

All things being equal - having used both - I personally prefer MSSQL. Either one will get the job done though.

locosway
06-18-2010, 10:01 PM
And what about Postgresql? There's a lot of data showing it's just as fast as Oracle.

NaughtyMonkey
06-19-2010, 12:41 AM
I love Linux I've tried all of the top ones. Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Slackware, Mint, Puppy linux, Gentoo, GOS, Saboyon 4, PCLinux, Fedora 9 and 10, OpenSuse, Debian, Mandriva, Macpup, Elive Free, Dream Linux, Open Salaris, Open GEU, and I'm sure I have more discs around here somewhere. Hmmm.

nemisis1400
06-19-2010, 12:57 PM
wow the only linux versions i even knew of was ubuntu and debian

locosway
06-19-2010, 2:19 PM
wow the only linux versions i even knew of was ubuntu and debian

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Linux_distributions

kapache
06-19-2010, 8:47 PM
I've been using Unix/Linux since I was 16 years old, although am a SYSADMIN with tons of experience working In many Data Centers providing technical support to small and large businesses. I prefer using Linux for Server applications only and for home use Windows all the way I don't have the patience to deal with drivers or compatibility issues.

Saying all that am tire of this field. makes me wanna rm -fr /kapache

wilit
06-19-2010, 9:05 PM
I love Linux. If the wife didn't need Windows for work on the home computer, it'd be a strictly Linux machine.

shooterfpga
06-19-2010, 9:19 PM
ive, been running linux since debian 2.2r6. LONG TIME. i love linux, it's always done what i needed. and im glad to see that a lot of distros out there are being born to help convert others to it. i run linux on all my hardware, anything that can run it, i'll put it on it. playstations, cell phones, routers, ANYTHING!!! looking at the poll results im very shocked to see the responses, this shows how far along linux has come. but im still a stickler for the distros like gentoo, where you have to know a lil more than your average user.

kapache
06-24-2010, 3:35 PM
Linux is old but not that many people care learning or bother using it.

locosway
06-24-2010, 3:48 PM
Linux is old but not that many people care learning or bother using it.

That's an ignorant statement. Entire governments in other countries are running on Linux. I also think that 80% or so of all web servers are running Linux.

The U.S. is slow to adopt Linux in the home, but that's mainly because of marketing. Windows has a strong foothold here, and people are afraid of change in general.

I'd say that Linux would work for most people here in the U.S. with a few exceptions of say hardcore gamers or accountants.

Sinixstar
06-24-2010, 8:40 PM
And what about Postgresql? There's a lot of data showing it's just as fast as Oracle.

It's just another SQL based Relational database system.


The problem with a lot of these performance comparisons- is that all of these systems function differently under the hood. A table and index structure that runs well in oracle could be incredibly inefficient in MSSQL - and average in MySQL or Postgre.

That's why I said it all comes down to the DBA - and that person's level of understanding of the system they're working with. If you understand the pros and cons of the underlying functionality, you can design a database that maximizes the 'pros' and reduces the 'cons' so to speak.

Which you choose more often than not comes down a combination of available resources, need, and capabilities.

Sinixstar
06-24-2010, 8:54 PM
That's an ignorant statement. Entire governments in other countries are running on Linux. I also think that 80% or so of all web servers are running Linux.

The U.S. is slow to adopt Linux in the home, but that's mainly because of marketing. Windows has a strong foothold here, and people are afraid of change in general.

I'd say that Linux would work for most people here in the U.S. with a few exceptions of say hardcore gamers or accountants.

I've seen the "80%" number thrown around for a long time, and honestly - it's a vastly inflated number. The only people that even try to claim those numbers are linux enthusiasts themselves - and somehow i'm guessing they don't exactly have an unbiased opinion.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13505_3-10027925-16.html
Granted this article is from '08 - but if the numbers had jumped THAT much over the last 2 years, this wouldn't even be a topic of conversation.

These are much more realistic numbers.

Now - if you wanted to push it - you could fudge the definition of "server". Technically, I have a dozen or so linux "servers" - but in reality, it's one machine that's been virtualized to hell. Is that one server, or 12? really, it's 1. It's set up to act like 12 in order to maintain isolation between client applications. There may be other ways to achieve this - but the way I (or rather, my host) has it set up is pretty simple. I have access to an actual machine. If I need to create a new 'server' - it's a matter of a few clicks. As long as I keep an eye on resource allocation across the virtual farm - I could have as many virtual servers as I want.

Again - in reality - it's still just one machine..

7x57
06-24-2010, 9:00 PM
In the interest of balance, I will concede that Linux is sadly deficient in the number and variety of window managers available. ;)

7x57

SOCMOB
06-24-2010, 10:04 PM
OSX is BSD UNIX with a pretty desktop, actually it's most like the old IRIX.

It's cool that this system is unix but the truth is, I never go to terminal window unless I need to finger someone (hehe) and I don't find myself having to do that these days.

JDay
06-25-2010, 5:08 PM
In the interest of balance, I will concede that Linux is sadly deficient in the number and variety of window managers available. ;)

7x57

:rofl2: You're funny.

bigmike82
06-25-2010, 6:41 PM
"Again - in reality - it's still just one machine..."
Yes....1 machine, but 12 servers. That's the beauty of virtualization.