[ LUGOS ] aja
Matija Grabnar
matija.grabnar na k2.net
Tor Maj 13 09:45:46 CEST 1997
Seveda sem pozabil pripeti prej omenjeni sporocili.
Se oproscam...
--
"My name is Not Important. Not to friends.
But you can call me mr. Important" - Not J. Important
Matija.Grabnar na k2.net, webmaster na k2.net A Slovenian and an Atarian
K2.net, Resljeva 1, Ljubljana K2.net - our name is our domain
>From - Tue May 13 07:56:30 1997
Return-Path: <owner-linux-admin-outgoing na vger.rutgers.edu>
Received: from wolverine.hq.cic.net by eiger.k2.net (MX V4.2 VAX) with SMTP;
Tue, 13 May 1997 07:40:15 +0200
Received: from vger.rutgers.edu (root na vger.rutgers.edu [128.6.190.2]) by
wolverine.hq.cic.net (8.8.6.Beta3/8.6.12) with ESMTP id BAA22259;
Tue, 13 May 1997 01:39:58 -0400
Received: by vger.rutgers.edu id <970870-32754>; Fri, 9 May 1997 04:57:55 -0400
Received: from cumulus.blitz.de ([194.113.47.19]) by vger.rutgers.edu with
ESMTP id <970862-32754>; Fri, 9 May 1997 04:57:40 -0400
Received: (from inmail na localhost) by cumulus.blitz.de (8.8.5/8.7.3) id KAA12357
for <linux-admin na vger.rutgers.edu>; Fri, 9 May 1997 10:58:30 +0200
Received: from jmohr.blitz.de(194.113.47.148) by cumulus.blitz.de via smap
(V1.3) id sma012352; Fri May 9 10:57:59 1997
Received: by jmohr.blitz.de with Microsoft Mail id
<01BC5C70.321598E0 na jmohr.blitz.de>; Fri, 9 May 1997 11:57:40 +-200
Message-ID: <01BC5C70.321598E0 na jmohr.blitz.de>
From: James Mohr <jimmo na blitz.net>
To: "linux-admin na vger.rutgers.edu" <linux-admin na vger.rutgers.edu>
Subject: RE: Linux/NT comparison
Date: Fri, 9 May 1997 11:57:37 +-200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-linux-admin na vger.rutgers.edu
Precedence: bulk
X-Mozilla-Status: 0015
Content-Length: 15924
Hi Peter!
This list is incomplete and somewhat disorganized. However, there are some
important issues involved. The best comparison between Linux and NT is like
between a meal cooked by a Cordon Bleu chef and a TV dinner. The chef will
cook it the way you like it, give you a wide range of choices and he is genuinely
concerned that you like what he prepare. Any idiot can toss a TV dinner into
the oven. The choice of meals is limited and the response is "If you don't like it,
try something else." Plus the Cordon Blue chef cooks according to standards
that other chefs can follow. The TV dinner is created just so that it looks good
in the package and people will buy it. Whatever is inside is anybody's guess.
However, the price of the two are reveresed. You get a Cordon Blue OS for the
price of a TV dinner.
All comments, complaints, additions, etc are very welcome.
Regards,
jimmo
ALL OF THESE ISSUES ASSUME A BASE SYSTEM WITH NO EXTRA
PRODUCTS INSTALLED UNLESS SPECIFICALLY MENTIONED.
The biggest thing we have encounted is configarability. Let's forget for the
moment that Linux provides you the source code. Have you ever tried to
find something in the NT registry let alone change it? Volumes have been
written on how to work with this and it is still very complicated. Add to the
fact that one screw up and your system won't even boot. With UNIX the
majority of the configuration files are all text files and straight forward to
change. Plus you don't have to reboot every time you do something as
basic as adding a new TCP/IP address or changing a route. Linux even
allows you to add drivers to the running kernel.
Plus you *do* have the source code for Linux. I have a ethernet card, ISDN
card and multi-port board that all wanted the same IRQ. In about ten
minutes I had the machine running with all of these cards. (It took me that
long to find the right entry in the source.) However, I could have handed off
the parameters to LILO every time I booted. You can't change the parameters
on the fly like that with NT. Also try installing NT where directories are spread
out across multiple drives.
Unfortunately, we do not have any apps that run on both platforms, so I
don't have specific numbers on performance. However, the human
peformance is significantly less on an NT machine as we have to wade
through all of the GUI interfaces. There is no character mode
administration. There are a few tools if you have bought(!!!) the resource
kit, but we have found them to be very cumbesome at best. In order to do
remote administration across a phone lin, you need to have remote access
(RAS) installed. You cannot simply use just any old terminal program as
you can with UNIX.
We have several hundred users in an NT domain connecting from WFWG and
NTWS. This domain consists of eight physical locations, with seven backup domain
controllers and is connected with six other domains, spread out around the world.
We have to reboot the server at least once a week because either the logon server
gets confused and you can no longer make new connections or the master browser
get confused and you can no longer look for particular machine names in any domain.
Microsoft support says it's a hardware problem (no valid reason) and the hardware
vendor says its a OS problem. The kicker is that we run exclusively on DEC
equipment and if any two vendors are closely tied it has to be MS and DEC. The
Server CD even has a DEC logo on it, so you would expect them to work together.
UNIX will run on more than twice as many platforms as NT. If you want a
particular configuration, you can get it. Real-time is also possible. Even if
you have a 286, you can run UNIX. (Okay, XENIX). SCO even has a product
that provides B1 security.
Although there are a few minor differences, it is easier to go between
different versions of UNIX than from Windows 3.11 to 95 or NT 3.51 to 4.0.
Basic concept in Windows is that Microsoft tells you what is best for you.
Configuration is limited to what the designers think is best.
NT provides very limited tools to enhance your system. No developement
tools like Linux. Have you ever tried to create a complex BAT script?
Case: We converted an application from VAX to NT so that all of our
technical applications would be on the same platform. However, VAX has
version numbers in their file names that confused NT. We copied
thousands of files onto our UNIX machine, I wrote a script in about 5
minutes to strip off the version number. So what if this is a function of the
shell, sed or whatever. These tools are an intergral part of UNIX and
nothing comes close on the NT side.
Converting Web pages so that the names do not get scrambled. Search for
all files anywhere on the system that end in .html and convert them to .htm
for the Windows weanies. Not on the NT machine. Have to do it from UNIX.
Kernel Parameters: NT has three settings for "performance" (local apps,
mixed, network). Even without the source code, many (most?) UNIX
dialects allow you to change the bevhavior to suite your needs.
Bug fixes. NT: Maybe in the next release. Not the one that is currently being
worked on, but the one after that. Maybe. Linux: Depending on scope with a
week, I have seen then the *same day*.
Support: NT: Pay through the nose and other parts of your anatomy. Linux:
Thousands of people providing it world-wide for *free*. Downside isn that in
an emergency you cannot get effective help this way. However, the number
of consultants world wide is approaching 200 and the larger Linux vendors
also provide support.
The GUI on NT is a real memory hog. Look at the recommended memory
requirements even before you add your first users. The suggestion in 24-32
MB. Linux will handle it with half that if it is not running X.
NT is designed as a file and print server. Despite the fact that certain
applications (particularly databases) run "on behalf" of a user, it is *not* a
multi-user system. Helen Custer even says this in her Microsoft Press book
Inside Windows NT. If you have 10 people running an application on 10
Windows PC, there are 10 copies of it in memory (one per PC). If a similar
app is running on a UNIX machine and users are accessing via X, there will
only be one copy in memory. The UNIX memory management will keep
track of the text segment/region so that it is shared among all the users.
This means less total memory for the system. In addition, non-NT machines
must load the entire program into memory (not counting DLLs), whereas
UNIX just brings in what is needed. This means the total memory
requirements for the system is even less.
Having to do everything through the GUI has cost us days of work. Creating
a user on NT takes serveral minutes. On most UNIX machines this can be
done from a script. I have take a list of dozens on users on Linux, SCO,
and Digital UNIX and had them all created with home directories and the
right groups in about three minutes. Okay, writing the script to do that took
me about 10 minutes. However, once the script was done, I could keep
using it.
We have branch offices all over the world. Sometimes the office has an
existing computer network (usually NT server and WFWG or Win95
workstations). When we finally connect them to our global network, we
have to reinstall the server. Why: You cannot configure the server as a
backup domain controller (BDC) without it being able to access the primary
domain controller (PDC). Once the server is configured as a primary, you
cannot intergrate it into an existing domain. Each security object has an ID
the is dependant on it's domain. Therefore, the domain cannot be "merge"
with another. This means that all of the users need to be re-created and the
permissions on *all* of the files and directories needs to be set by hand.
See below.
We made the mistake of rotating our backups every week in some of our
offices. That is, we only had five tapes. We discovered that although NT
Backup and the Event Viewer reported all was well, it wasn't. The system
crashed and we had to reinstall. We then discovered that the tape was
unreadable. However, it worked fine when we installed originally. Since our
data was on another drive, it was untouched, but not well. All the
permissions we based on the original installation. Although, we could re-
create the users, the permissions on the files and directories no longer
valid. As far as NT was concerned. These were different systems.
Therefore, once again, we had to re-create the permissions by hand. See
below.
Case: Find all files on a system with a particular owner. Now change the
owner to someone else. (A new secretary takes over in our office in Dublin
and we need to give her access to the same files as the previous
secretary.) However, not the accounting files, just the word processing files.
Also when we "merge" domains"
CASE: All files in a directory and many levels of sub-directories are
readable by the IT department, but read-writeable by IT-documentation
(ITDOC). Change all files (not directories) in a particular sub-tree so that
one additional user now has write access. Making them a member of the
group ITDOC doesn't work as you do not want to give them access all over,
just one sub-tree.
We have 600+ users world wide. How many users are there exactly? How
many groups? To find out in UNIX a couple of minutes. NT: Count them by
hand!
We have two machines as our CDROM server. Why two? NT can only
handle up to 23 additional drives. (A:, B: and C: at a minimum are already
taken).
I have an application that I want to have the window border red, the menus
white on black and the background blue. But only this one applications. I
have other applications that I want to have different colors schemes to
make them easier to find on the desktop. X can do it.
We have discovered that someone has a broken into our network. On just a
single machine, how long will it take to check 5 groups to see if there are
any additional users added? (Such as the admistrators group) UNIX 5
seconds. NT 5 minutes. (per machines)
Find all .tmp, .bak, .sav files on the system and compress them. (But only if
they are more than a week old.) No way on NT.
I have a job that I know is going to take a long time to run, so I want to run
will a lower priority than normal. UNIX: OK, no worries. NT: No way.
How often is a particular application being used? How often is it started and
how long is it run for? How many are running at this very moment?
How many users are currently using the system? Is Joe Smith logged in?
SAMBA: An inexepensive (NOT cheap) replacement for the file and print
server functionality of NT. UNIX: Default configuration has home directories
set up. Once a user is created, their home directory is available from
windows machines. Total time: The time to create the script (see above)
NT: After creating the user (by hand, can't do it automatically) where you
have to explictely specifically a "home" directory, you then have to create
the directory, and set permissions. Total time ca. 5 minutes *per user*.
SAMBA is also a proven package. I work for German manufacturer of
industrial equipment. We use SAMBA to make available all of the programs
for our CNC (computerized numeric control) machines. These are the
machines that cut, drill, and turn all of the piece for the machines that we
build. There was also an article about it in the Jan '97 issue of SCO World
despite the fact that SCO has their own product: Advanced File and Print
Server.
Licensing: Linux: free, unlimited users. NT: Pay for the OS on the clients,
pay for the server, pay for the right to access the server from the clients.
This applies for all Microsoft products. Pay for the server and then for each
client accessing the server.
NT 4.0, both Server and Workstation have very annoying bug. The drive
letters for network drives get confused. We have a set of about six that are
connected automatically at start-up. Although these do not change, other
drive letters are mysteriously added that are the *same* as existing drive
letters. For example, R: is connected to the share \\nt3\data1. Suddenly, we
will see that F: is also connected to \\nt3\data1. This wouldn't be too much of
a problem except for running application get confused as well. In Word 7.0
(we won't let people install Office 97 because all of the bugs we have
found), I save a file to R:. The next time I reboot, I loose the F: drive and
now Word can no longer find the file as it is looking for it on F: although I
explicitely saved it to R:. This also happens with the shortcuts on the
desktop. Suddenly, the point to drives that do not exist and as a result, the
shortcut no longer works.
In fairness, I have to say that for the inexperienced user with little real
computer knowledge NT is much easier to administer and configure. If you
do not want to stray from what Microsoft dictates as "necessary", you are
fine. However, learning UNIX is like learning a foreign language. Once you
have overcome the initial intimidation, there is a whole new power
available to you. You can do something that other people (or other OSes)
can't.
NT security is generally better than UNIX. However, "stricter" might be a
more appropriate word than "better." It is theoretically harder to crack NT
password as they use a larger encryption key. However, the standard attack
is still a dictionary attack and that work effectively no matter how large the
key is. The major problem with NT security is that you cannot get around it.
There were several examples above where this security mechanism has become
more of a problem than it is worth.
On our NT workstations, we configured User profiles. It helps to keep people from
causing too much trouble, but it still limits what a user can do much to much. One
of the biggest problems is the Microsoft apps. You can change the configuration
for the current session (such as adding macros, changing styles, adding buttons to
the tools bar). However, this is saved in an area that users shouldn't have access to.
There are even entries written to the registry and we are not going to give them
permisson to do that. As a result, users either have to reconfigure everything from
scratch or forget it.
If you want ammunition, check out my article in the March BYTE. If you live
outside of North America, you'll have to look for it on-line. This is a brief
look at why you should consider Linux in business. There is a list of just a
few companies that run Linux. One, SIXT Rent-a-car, runs exclusibely on
Linux. I have a book due out from Prentice Hall shortly that goes into a lot
more details on why you should consider Linux and what can do to
implement it in a business.
----------
From: Peter Hicks[SMTP:peter.hicks na poggs.paralex.co.uk]
Sent: Freitag, 9. Mai 1997 02:28
To: linux-admin na vger.rutgers.edu
Subject: Linux/NT comparison
People,
I have to convince a rather Microsoft-loving boss that we should install
our first mail/DNS/POP3 server using Linux, as opposed to Windows NT.
Are there any documents I can use as leverage for my case? I've read the
Linux Advocacy HOWTO, and that's given me some useful tips, but I have to
also get around a Network Manager who views Linux as ABOS (Another Bloody
Operating System).
On the same sort of subject, has anyone had experience with setting up a
Linux box so as to run, self-correct most of its problems, and generally
act as a 'black box' requiring little or no management ('cept for
configuration changes or to give it a little tweak when the power goes
out!)?
Peter Hicks
Network Engineer
peter.hicks na poggs.paralex.co.uk
>From - Tue May 13 09:19:14 1997
Return-Path: <owner-linux-admin-outgoing na vger.rutgers.edu>
Received: from wolverine.hq.cic.net by eiger.k2.net (MX V4.2 VAX) with SMTP;
Tue, 13 May 1997 08:05:31 +0200
Received: from vger.rutgers.edu (root na vger.rutgers.edu [128.6.190.2]) by
wolverine.hq.cic.net (8.8.6.Beta3/8.6.12) with ESMTP id CAA23759;
Tue, 13 May 1997 02:05:25 -0400
Received: by vger.rutgers.edu id <971000-32752>; Fri, 9 May 1997 10:25:10 -0400
Received: from cumulus.blitz.de ([194.113.47.19]) by vger.rutgers.edu with
ESMTP id <970994-32752> convert rfc822-to-8bit; Fri, 9 May 1997
10:24:18 -0400
Received: (from inmail na localhost) by cumulus.blitz.de (8.8.5/8.7.3) id QAA07121
for <linux-admin na vger.rutgers.edu>; Fri, 9 May 1997 16:24:03 +0200
Received: from jmohr.blitz.de(194.113.47.148) by cumulus.blitz.de via smap
(V1.3) id sma007117; Fri May 9 16:23:41 1997
Received: by jmohr.blitz.de with Microsoft Mail id
<01BC5C9D.B49C6320 na jmohr.blitz.de>; Fri, 9 May 1997 17:23:26 +-200
Message-ID: <01BC5C9D.B49C6320 na jmohr.blitz.de>
From: James Mohr <jimmo na blitz.net>
To: "linux-admin na vger.rutgers.edu" <linux-admin na vger.rutgers.edu>
Subject: RE: Linux/NT comparison
Date: Fri, 9 May 1997 17:05:47 +-200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
Sender: owner-linux-admin na vger.rutgers.edu
Precedence: bulk
X-Mozilla-Status: 0015
Content-Length: 2595
Hi Peter!
Here's another issue that just hit me. There is basically no way to have a distributed system with NT in
which files are shared across systems. For example, you could have a /usr filesystem that was mounted
via NFS from a central server. When application are updated, you only need to update a single machine
and the changes are automatic for all machines. When you want to update an NT machine, you have to
reinstall the entire OS on every machine, which means physically going there and inserting disks and
CDs. SMS supposedly allows you to do the upgrade automatically from a central place. However, we
have had very limited success with it and have left half of our remote NT servers at 3.51 for fear of
messing them up as well. Additionally, you cannot install/upgrade selected components like you can with
Linux. This is just another example of Microsoft telling you where you should go today.
Joseph Weizenbaum of MIT said in reference to computers:
"Science has promised man power...But, as so often happens when people are seduced by promises
of power, the price is servitude and impotence. Power is nothing if it is not the power to choose."
Linux is choice - Linux is power
Microsoft is submission to what Microsoft thinks is best for you - Microsoft is servitude
Regards,
jimmo
PS. Have your boss check out the BYTE web site (www.byte.com) and look for the article "Linux in a
Gray Flannel Suit." The most glaring mistake I made was downplaying the support Linux has. Currently, there are over 180 companies (Mostly US and Germany) that provide Linux consulting and services. Support is there and it is far better than Microsoft.
----------
From: Peter Hicks[SMTP:peter.hicks na poggs.paralex.co.uk]
Sent: Freitag, 9. Mai 1997 02:28
To: linux-admin na vger.rutgers.edu
Subject: Linux/NT comparison
People,
I have to convince a rather Microsoft-loving boss that we should install
our first mail/DNS/POP3 server using Linux, as opposed to Windows NT.
Are there any documents I can use as leverage for my case? I've read the
Linux Advocacy HOWTO, and that's given me some useful tips, but I have to
also get around a Network Manager who views Linux as ABOS (Another Bloody
Operating System).
On the same sort of subject, has anyone had experience with setting up a
Linux box so as to run, self-correct most of its problems, and generally
act as a 'black box' requiring little or no management ('cept for
configuration changes or to give it a little tweak when the power goes
out!)?
Peter Hicks
Network Engineer
peter.hicks na poggs.paralex.co.uk
Dodatne informacije o seznamu Starilist