on 01:00 Mon 28 Feb, Jason Hsu (jhsu802...@jasonhsu.com) wrote: > I can't comment on other distros as servers, as my experience at the > server level has so far been with a minimal command-line only Debian > Stable installation. (When I'm given the option of installing > packages for the graphical desktop, web server, mail server, etc., I > don't select any of them.)
You're going to get a pretty obvious bias asking this question on a Debian list. > I tried this minimal Debian installation on the desktop in the past > and didn't like it. But at the server level, I really appreciate the > minimalism. As I have found from trying to upgrade Lenny to Squeeze, > certain things about certain packages change. Thus, the more packages > you have installed, the more difficult is, because you multiply your > chances of running into problems. Given that most companies and > organizations need their servers running 24/7/365, it makes sense to > use the most stable OS possible for the server. Debian is known for > stability in the Linux world, and the Stable branch is stable even by > Debian standards. The server doesn't require as many applications as > the desktop, so I don't mind a bare-bones Debian installation at the > server level. Given concerns about security at the server level, a > bare-bones installation seems better, as more applications mean the > potential for more security holes. Without discussing merits of any one OS/distros, the rationales I've seen given are generally: - Organizational familiarity -- what do you know. - Marketing in general. Not just advertising, but various parternships (hardware, ISV, service providers). It can be effective. - Application support. Particularly in the realm of proprietary ISV third-party apps: what is vendor-supported? I've seen otherwise Debian shops opt for RHEL on Oracle servers. - Hardware support. Whether the issue is CPU architecture (Debian arguably runs on more platforms than any other OS) or simply vendor support for/under OSes of servers, expansion devices, and/or peripheral hardware. - Ease/cost of management. I'd give Debian very, very high marks here. APT, backports, package selection, and auxiliary management tools (stow, checkinstall, alien, and apt-build among others) make sane management of both distro-provided and third-party software vastly easier than any other platform I've had familiarity with (and hence: contempt for). With some 30,000+ packages, the in-distro availability of software trumps any other distro/OS. - Long-term support. For production environments, it's very helpful to have a system which one can deploy and leave in place for the life of hardware (3-7 years generally). Upgrades don't matter BECAUSE YOU NEVER UPGRADE. Individual packages are updated for security/bugfix reasons. The number of frighteningly brittle production systems in existance is petrifying. - Managed hosting. Various managed hosting providers will offer a set of standard, supported platforms. For a small startup, not having to worry about systems administration issues at the initial stage can be a win. OSes with corporate backing and marketing to create partnership agreements will be more successful here. - Suitability to task. For a firewall, OpenBSD makes a very persuasive argument (hardened, designed for the task, secure-by-default, very solid security history). For mobile devices you'd need your head examined to not look strongly at Android (yes, Nokia, I'm talking to you). Desktop gives you the choice of Microsoft, Apple, or numerous Linux distros. Debian, while not specifically optimized for any one task (it's the "universal operating system") can be slotted into a vast range of tasks with ease, and high suitability. - Decreasingly: FUD. In the early oughts I interviewd with the CTO of a company who in all seriousness cited patent / lawsuit risk, specifically mentioning the SCO/Caldera lawsuits against IBM and Novell, as concerns for adopting Linux. This is pretty much a dead-ender rationale today. > Given all this, what are the reasons for using the other server > operating systems? The naive answer is that someone felt they were worth creating, and someone else thought they were worth deploying. > WHY WHY WHY are there Windows servers out there? Oh, now we get to discuss other platform merits.... See the list above, starting with the first item. For many shops, there's an appeal to "one platform, all systems". I have the same preference, though the platform I choose differs from these shops. > Why do people use Ubuntu on the server given that Debian is more > stable? See the list above, start with marketing. Suitability to task (ease of installation, end-user desktop orientation) also played a role, though IMO it's got little if any edge over Debian in this regard now. Less, for me, as I don't care for the direction of Ubuntu's desktop polish. > Why do people use RedHat given that it has proprietary features in it? > (While it's not Windows, it sounds like a step in the wrong > direction.) I've heard that CentOS is MUCH more difficult to upgrade > than Debian, so why do people use CentOS on the server? See the list above, starting with marketing. Red Hat had a huge lead over Ubuntu, and while it continues to hold the edge, it's slipped very significantly at least in mindshare. This does speak to the vastly superior package management / general administrative ease and flexibility of APT, both in terms of end-user administration and the rate at which Ubuntu have increased the quality/capabilities of their offerings. LTS, hardware support, ISV support, "the number one name in Linux" all play major roles. CentOS: shops which want all the flexibility, administrative ease, and power of Red Hat with all the marketing and third-party vendor support of Debian. Or could they just be cheap bastards? Actually, simply getting away from the hassles of RHN is a pretty big win. -- Dr. Ed Morbius, Chief Scientist / | Robot Wrangler / Staff Psychologist | When you seek unlimited power Krell Power Systems Unlimited | Go to Krell! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110228190759.ga4...@altaira.krellpowersys.exo