mac vs. windows servers

NetworkGod

I just had the craziest argument about OSX vs. Windows 2k/2k3.
What do you think is better and why? (Remember we're talking about servers)

Slowhand

Personally, I have to wonder why you'd choose a Mac OSX server over, say, a FreeBSD server when you're talking about what to put up against Microsoft's Server product. My experience has been that most Mac servers run Unix services, anyway, and there's little you can do with them that you couldn't do with a standard x86 or x86-64 piece of hardware and a distro of Unix or Linux, especially for the money I've seen Mac servers running for, at the specs they have.

So, in this case, having had a bit of experience with Mac servers, a lot of experience with Windows servers, I'd say that Microsoft servers offer a bit more flexibility in terms of what hardware you can get, affordability, and what services and applications can be installed on them.

As for the security issue, which is always the card pulled when talking about <insert name of software vendor here> Vs. Microsoft: yes, Windows is more susceptable to viruses and spyware (but that doesn't mean there aren't any for the Unix-based OS'es). However, for server environments, things like DOS attacks, bruteforce attacks, etc., are a very real threat, and they don't tend to discriminate when it comes to sotware platforms or vendors. So, as far as security goes, each OS has it's strengths and weaknesses, and I tend to look at the actual features and versatility of the operating system when asked which is 'better'.

So, in this case, I'd say that I'd go for Microsoft Windows Server. Then again, I'm also a little biased, since I'm a fan of AD.

seuss_ssues

My opinion:
Windows (AD) for intranet purposes, users, shares, etc <

---

a 2003 server and a windows client base make for a pretty good lan setup.

*nix for internet servers - web, ftp, mail (i know there is exchange, but hotmail is(used?) to be ran off of unix so that says something.


They are both just tools. Each has its strengths and weaknesses.

plettner

I'm with seuss_ssues. AD on a 2003 environment is a sweet setup.

Mac servers? Wasn't there a tool on the Internet to see what servers were being used as web servers. You could enter the web address and the tool would check to see what server product was used to run the site. I remember Apple had a few of sites which didn't use Mac OS Server. If I remember, I think one Apple site was using Windows 2000 (Apple in India or something) . The others ran Unix and I think the US site did use Mac OS Server. It was a couple of years since I checked.

elover_jm

crazy man really crazy..........

please close this thread

seuss_ssues

Why close it? Is there something I missed?

Treg

Macs = Giant paper weight thats what

Sie

plettner wrote:

I'm with seuss_ssues. AD on a 2003 environment is a sweet setup.

Mac servers? Wasn't there a tool on the Internet to see what servers were being used as web servers. You could enter the web address and the tool would check to see what server product was used to run the site. I remember Apple had a few of sites which didn't use Mac OS Server. If I remember, I think one Apple site was using Windows 2000 (Apple in India or something) . The others ran Unix and I think the US site did use Mac OS Server. It was a couple of years since I checked.

Netcraft?
http://news.netcraft.com/

Also can use stack fingerprinting but im going off topic now.

Back on topic I would consider MAC desktops but have never had a thought about running a MAC server

Slowhand

seuss_ssues wrote:

*nix for internet servers - web, ftp, mail (i know there is exchange, but hotmail is(used?) to be ran off of unix so that says something.

Hotmail wasn't always owned by Microsoft. When they first started out, they ran on a BSD distro. Once Microsoft bought them out, those servers were replaced with Windows Server NT at first, then 2000, 2003, and so on. These days, it's all run on Microsoft software: Windows Server 2003 and Exchange 2003/2007.

That isn't to say that keeping them on BSD would have been better or worse, but no software vendor would really want to run one of their services on a competing product when they make their own server operating system and mail server, so you can't really blame Microsoft for making the change. If it had been Red Hat, for example, buying a similar service, it's a sure bet that all the server would be running Red Hat Enterprise Linux before long.

plettner

Sie wrote:

plettner wrote:

I'm with seuss_ssues. AD on a 2003 environment is a sweet setup.

Mac servers? Wasn't there a tool on the Internet to see what servers were being used as web servers. You could enter the web address and the tool would check to see what server product was used to run the site. I remember Apple had a few of sites which didn't use Mac OS Server. If I remember, I think one Apple site was using Windows 2000 (Apple in India or something) . The others ran Unix and I think the US site did use Mac OS Server. It was a couple of years since I checked.

Netcraft?
http://news.netcraft.com/

Also can use stack fingerprinting but im going off topic now.

Back on topic I would consider MAC desktops but have never had a thought about running a MAC server

Yes. That's the one!

Thanks

opers13

NetworkGod wrote:

I just had the craziest argument about OSX vs. Windows 2k/2k3.
What do you think is better and why? (Remember we're talking about servers)

If you are looking at cost/licensing Apple OSX server is your best choice. Apple's Xserver comes with an unlimited user license...unlike Microsoft.

When I was a systems admin., we only purchased OS X servers and Apple XRAID SAN.

BTW, Apple's XRAID SAN is certified by Microsoft and Cisco. You can also buy just the SAN unit and attached it to a PC via a PCI fiber channel card.

You can also bind OSX servers and desktops to AD for authentication.

opers13

Sie

plettner wrote:

Sie wrote:

plettner wrote:

Netcraft?
http://news.netcraft.com/

Also can use stack fingerprinting but im going off topic now.

Back on topic I would consider MAC desktops but have never had a thought about running a MAC server

Yes. That's the one!

Thanks

No probs.

garv221

I'm waiting for the day when I do not have to buy a Windows Server.