I had a brief discussion with a microsoft marketing guy some days before.
Based upon what he said, and his followup mail, it seems that latest
Windows is not like its predecessors.
He sent me a benchmark attachment, the URL of which is:
We are using linux extensively in our office, and I have personally seen Linux
Samba servers outperform Windows 2000 Servers as a PDC. From the report (see
pdf attachment), a Windows 2003 Server seems to outperform Linux by a huge
Has anyone used/compared Windows 2003 Server? Some people insist that
Microsoft products such as Windows Servers and MS Exchange, increase
productivity in the organization. (i am not a windows admin, and personally
my productivity goes down with windows servers). We have Linux servers and
they are running fine. Windows servers may be easy to configure and deploy,
but what about the time spent on virus threats and bluescreens(does Win 2003
still have that?). I feel, linux is like 'install, configure and forget it'
type. What about windows?
Forgetting that I am a linux admin, what are the advantages/disadvantages of a
complete server side MS environment(Windows servers, IIS, Exchange, Project
etc) and that of opensource (linux, freebsd, sendmail, apache etc). How come
huge organizations are still completely relying on MS technologies with all
these virus and worm threats? Why dont they move to other platforms?
System Administrator - Infrastructure Team
SIP Technologies & Exports Limited,
G4, Elnet Software City, CPT Road,
Taramani, Chennai 600 113,
Fax: Â +91-44-22541475