+ Post New Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 21 of 21
General Chat Thread, Why Windows Server? in General; We run a mix between the two - and it works well - we use Ubuntu and qemu/KVM for the ...
  1. #16

    glennda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Sussex
    Posts
    7,821
    Thank Post
    272
    Thanked 1,140 Times in 1,036 Posts
    Rep Power
    351
    We run a mix between the two - and it works well - we use Ubuntu and qemu/KVM for the virtualization. Which out performs the likes of ESX and Hyperv as it runs inside the kernel. Squid and Dansguardian for Proxy

    We have Windows Dc's and Sql Server (sims) - some file servers are Windows and I am slowly moving them to Samba when we replace servers. Also have an ISA server as our gateway but will be changing that at somepoint i presume. Also a Couple of windows app servers for Mcaffee and other windows apps.

    Nobody could tell from the front end of things that half the backend is linux.

  2. Thanks to glennda from:

    SYNACK (9th November 2010)

  3. #17
    mrbios's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Stroud, Gloucestershire
    Posts
    2,631
    Thank Post
    378
    Thanked 270 Times in 222 Posts
    Rep Power
    103
    I think it has to be looked at in a big picture of the job role covering it... finding someone who can manage a linux focused network is going to be harder than finding someone capable of managing a windows network, and considering school IT wages that makes it even more unlikely. So in the long run when the linux man leaves and they need another they will find it difficult to get someone with the required skill set who will work for the pay offered.

    Personally the only linux boxes we run here are a couple of VMs running as proxy servers, 2 MX servers and a gateway server. Everything else is kept as windows.

  4. Thanks to mrbios from:

    SYNACK (9th November 2010)

  5. #18
    CAM
    CAM is offline


    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    4,371
    Thank Post
    875
    Thanked 411 Times in 311 Posts
    Blog Entries
    61
    Rep Power
    314
    linuxgirlie on here maintains a Linux Distro called Karoshi that is designed for schools. Not sure on it's specs but may be worth a look.

    Also does anyone know how network based accounts will affect security on a linux machine? My understanding is you have a normal user and a super-user (root). And unless you have access to the root user through the su command you can't access anyone else's files on the machine or mess up settings. So LDAP server to authenticate logins and let the client do the rest?

  6. #19

    dhicks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Knightsbridge
    Posts
    5,733
    Thank Post
    1,294
    Thanked 797 Times in 693 Posts
    Rep Power
    239
    Quote Originally Posted by localzuk View Post
    Sure, if you have linux clients, or mac clients, then you don't need a windows server setup
    Having Windows clients implies having a Windows Domian Controller available, mostly to stop users breaking the machines by fiddling with the settings. Is there a way to get around that - can you run Windows workstations without having to have them join a domain? As I pointed out previously, could you run them as virtual desktops that simply reset to a given state when the user logs out? Or could you use something like DeepFreeze to maintain your workstations?

    --
    David Hicks

  7. #20


    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Leeds
    Posts
    6,951
    Thank Post
    232
    Thanked 909 Times in 780 Posts
    Rep Power
    305
    Quote Originally Posted by dhicks View Post
    We do all seem to be discussing one particular model of network management, where we have a central control server, workstations with differing locally-installed applications that need to be "locked down" the whole time to stop them being broken by day-to-day use and large wodges of user/application settings kocking around the place. This is the model imposed by Windows' way of doing networking, which has always struck me as an afterthought cludged together at the last moment. It'd be a lot simpler if we could do away with update servers, anti-virus servers and so on and have a system designed to be used over a network from the start.

    --
    David Hicks
    wouldnt that be a mainframe/thin client /dumb device?

  8. #21

    SYNACK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    11,270
    Thank Post
    884
    Thanked 2,747 Times in 2,321 Posts
    Blog Entries
    11
    Rep Power
    785
    Quote Originally Posted by dhicks View Post
    Having Windows clients implies having a Windows Domian Controller available, mostly to stop users breaking the machines by fiddling with the settings. Is there a way to get around that - can you run Windows workstations without having to have them join a domain?
    Any complex system that can do multiple things like a computer is going to contain mistakes or errors that need to be fixed via updates. People are not perfect and systems along with our understanding of them keep changing and evolving. Its funny that you meantion Windows Updates as an issue as I actually removed my Ubuntu box because downloading that may updates was eating a serious chunk out of my bandwith cap. If I want an update a day I'll install Oracle Java and leave it to its own faulty devices.

    Security through limitation is only feasibly avalible through ultra limited features like a landline phone, stuff with very few features that can be fully understood by a person. No advanced system is imune, just ask all those admins of compromised zombie comand and control linux server, your average ipad/iphone user who happens to look at the wrong pdf or a windows user owned by malware.

    Total security on systems that scale into the hundreds of millions of transisters is probably somehing that is beond the scope of human ability an I think that we will be waiting for a kind benovolent AI to get to that level or some other simmilar expantion of human ability.

    Anyhow I think that we have established that the main reasons to go with a Windows Server are pretty much what I put in my initial email to the people involved:
    More cheaper support avalible
    Better integration and standardisation with Windows Clients.
    Features like Group Policy and GPP which give you managment abilities you can't achive with a linux server without massive hacking and huge time spent.



SHARE:
+ Post New Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 63
    Last Post: 2nd December 2009, 05:50 PM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 4th September 2009, 01:48 AM
  3. Migrating from Windows 2000 Server to Windows Server 2008
    By Kamran7860 in forum Windows Server 2008
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 3rd April 2009, 11:29 AM

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •