Windows vs Linux w/ Servers

[DVX]

just wondering, but i've heard time and time again that windows is crap for servers, and linux is far more superior..  is windows truely crap for a server?  what do you guys think..?

[Yoni]

No.

[iago]

I think the issue is more the server software.  IIS has a fairly bad track record, and the Macintosh one has an extremely good track record.  But I don't see anybody running out to get the Mac one...

To quote a friend of mine, "IIS ftp?  You're lucky i don't hack anymore "

[Grok]

Zealots.  IIS FTP has no more innate bugs per feature than any other software.  Your friend makes a vague comment like that to get you to laugh at something he knows you would laugh at, because right now you're in college and learning to worship *nix.  During this time you have to nod, sway, and even shout your agreement with everything *nix, and try to exorcise everything established (IBM, Microsoft -- although you can praise IBM for now "adopting" Linux .. but before that, they were the Devil).

[Thing]

It is my opinion that vague generalizations are always wrong.
Saying "... windows is crap for servers, and linux is far more superior..." is a horrible generalization.

If you were to define what role the server is going to play, we could compare the strengths and weaknesses of different operating systems.

[iago]

Zealots.  IIS FTP has no more innate bugs per feature than any other software.  Your friend makes a vague comment like that to get you to laugh at something he knows you would laugh at, because right now you're in college and learning to worship *nix.  During this time you have to nod, sway, and even shout your agreement with everything *nix, and try to exorcise everything established (IBM, Microsoft -- although you can praise IBM for now "adopting" Linux .. but before that, they were the Devil).

Talk to tmp about that one

But like I said, it's more the software than the platform, like Apache is just as secure on windows as linux (probably).  There's actually some good information about this in the w3.org Security FAQ:
http://www.w3.org/Security/Faq/www-security-faq.html

They have a section for each OS.  I don't think they have win2003 yet, though, but it's still worth reading.

[Adron]

But like I said, it's more the software than the platform, like Apache is just as secure on windows as linux (probably).  

Apache has been known not to be as secure on windows as on linux. I don't know the current state, this is an old quote:

IMPORTANT NOTE FOR WIN32 USERS: Over the years, many users have come
to trust Apache as a secure and stable server. It must be realized
that the current Win32 code has not yet reached the levels of the Unix
version, but is of acceptable quality. Win32 stability or security
problems do not reflect on the Unix version.

[iago]

But like I said, it's more the software than the platform, like Apache is just as secure on windows as linux (probably).  

Apache has been known not to be as secure on windows as on linux. I don't know the current state, this is an old quote:

IMPORTANT NOTE FOR WIN32 USERS: Over the years, many users have come
to trust Apache as a secure and stable server. It must be realized
that the current Win32 code has not yet reached the levels of the Unix
version, but is of acceptable quality. Win32 stability or security
problems do not reflect on the Unix version.

"Acceptable quality" doesn't sound all that appealing :/

[Adron]

"Acceptable quality" doesn't sound all that appealing :/

Well, "Acceptable quality" is what you get, running Windows

But other than that, quality has probably improved since that quote.

[muert0]

with the windows source code out, there wont be a lot of problems with windows popping up?
I dont know just a speculation from someone who doesnt know much about any of it.
I know linux is open source so ppl can pick it apart already but most people want to pick on windows just because its windows.
blah i might just be rambling

[MrRaza]

I think you are, I've read some interesting articles on both Apache and IIS 3.0 and 4.0 about the different bugs each of them has and how to fix/gain access to them. But as I see it, I'll have to go with apache since it's the only real software bundle I've actually tried, and I didn't really have any trouble setting it up.

[mynameistmp]

DVX, if you're interested in Apache, I'd suggest installing ab(http://httpd.apache.org/docs-2.0/en/programs/ab.html, or http://httpd.apache.org/docs/programs/ab.html if v1.3 is preferred) and running some of your own _performance_ benchmarks. Security is another issue.

As far as security goes, I only know of one existing active 'defacement mirror': http://www.zone-h.com/en/defacements/special. Defacement mirrors like zone-h generally provide a fairly accurate reflection of what operating systems are being exploited.

An example of a popular benchmark I've seen floating around for scalability is: http://bulk.fefe.de/scalability/. Although that benchmark doesn't cover Windows, there is software appended to the presentation that could be used to perform your own benchmarks - someone should do that.