Hot answers tagged comparison
There are no benefits that I can discern for using CentOS (or RHEL) over Ubuntu if you are equally familiar with using both OSes. We use RHEL and CentOS heavily at work, and it's just painful -- we're building custom packages left and right because the OS doesn't come with them, and paid RedHat support is worse than useless, being chock full of "pillars of ...
Advantages of BSDs The *BSD family of systems has (IMHO) a few key advantages over Linux, particularly for a server O/S. Simplicity and Control: None of the *BSD distributions have the imperative to add features that the Linux distributors exhibit. Thus, the default install of most BSD derived systems is relatively simple. Stability: Partially driven by ...
'Enterprisey' server deployments are huge projects, with lots of inertia, and admins want to keep them running for many years with only bugfixes. Never new features without a well-rehearsed testing procedure. For this, it's really valuable to have a slow-moving foundation. So that other big and slow-moving projects can be validated on the new version ...
By default, CentOS is pretty restrictive in its package selection and slow in the updates to new packages because it literally is a repackage of RHEL, and RHEL is slow and steady for reliability sake. That being said, you have the ability to add other repositories which feature a wider selection and newer packages. Check this link for more possibilities: ...
Two reasons come to mind: First -- it is available practically everywhere. I have several Linux systems (CentOS 4.x in this case) which do not have zsh installed. Similarly I have to touch ancient systems like Solaris 2.6 and up, HP-UX 10 and up, and similarly creaky versions of AIX. Therefore I pretty much have to use bash on these computers, which I do ...
I don't consider BSD to be quite as mature as Linux on the Desktop but for servers it's rock solid. Whether you want to install BSD or not depends entirely on what you use your machine for. While many things are similar to Linux many things are different too. However here is a run down of the different BSDs OpenBSD : One if it's mail goals is to be the ...
The tool your looking for is rdiff. It works like combining rsync and diff. It creates a patch file which you can compare, or distribute.
So the two sane options these days are: WebDAV, nice on the server side, nice for Linux and Mac OS clients, however the inbuilt Windows client has issues. SCP/SFTP, very easy as you're likely to have ssh anyway, GUI clients easily available (FileZilla for example) Although FTP is still around I'd really avoid setting anything new up based on it.
Microsoft have been kind enough to have a whole page dedicated to your question (Clicky), and only a few clicks away from their landing page too! "Updated" link (to a pdf). "Updated" link (using Internet Archive Wayback machine)
One feature you may find your missing is Outlook. Yes you can use Outlook with Gmail, but not to the same level. You can't use Outlook to open other users calendars or mailboxes, accept meeting invites or get the same offline functionality. To get the full functionality of Gmail, you have to be using the web interface, which some user won't like. You ...
The "Killer Feature" is a near-identicalness to RedHat, which is the platform most targeted by third party vendors that offer support. RedHat suffers from flaws in that major new features are only introduced for "major" version bumps; minor version bumps are usually bug- and security-fix only. (Firefox is the major, perhaps only, exception to this rule.) ...
In the Linux world, distributions tend to be lacking in that... cohesive feeling. They are often built in a decentralized manner, which tends to lead to this. The BSDs are usually managed by one person, so you get the feeling that each variant is an actual product that had a lot of planning behind it. Things work together very well, and all components are ...
what are the advantages of using CentOS as a server over Ubuntu? I've found CentOS to support virtualisation under Xen better - I tried Ubuntu at first, but it kept crashing. I've had 10 servers running on CentOS for the past couple of years, no problems. I do use Ubuntu as the OS for virtual machines, though.
Bash generally comes with every system, zsh doesn't. I love zsh, but because of this, I use zsh for interactive use, but Bash for all my scripting. I find this keeps everything simpler, as even when I shopt whatever the bash compatible (setopt SH_WORD_SPLIT ?), I still run into subtle differences.
Yes, many. Just to name a few : DTrace, which allows you to display detailled and precise statistics about ressource usage using one line scripts SMF, which allows a clean and streamlined management of services. For example, it restarts services that crash and display short explanations about services refusing to stard. the included firewall is very simple ...
Absent other factors (known bugs that affect your environment/planned environment, vendor/software requirements, existing corporate environment, etc.), install the latest version of the OS you intend to use.
I considered making this switch at a private school I volunteer with. We decided to stick with Exchange for the following reasons: 1) End user re-training, they like Outlook alot. 2) Being able to find people in the directory of Outlook, I tried to find a way to re-produce this with Google Apps but I could not find one. Our users don't want to have to ...
Each distro has different strengths and different philosophies. Ubuntu aims to be easy to use. They are based on Debian but adopt a slightly more pragmatic approach, as opposed to Debian, which is more pure in their quest for Freedom. Ubuntu has LTS releases which are supported for 3 years. I'd say that's a minimum req for anyone intending to use lots of ...
Ubuntu is also released with a server edition, and you can get commercial support from Canonical.
BSD is generally considered secure by default, by disabling all but the core services. It's also very stable, you can tell this by looking at one of the many uptime monitoring services. Be warned however, that Linux isn't the same as BSD...there is a learning curve, so don't expect to jump straight into it. For example you'll find all the core commands, ...
Try Beyond Compare 3 (Scooter Software) which has versions for Windows and Linux. Once you've used it, you will probably not want to use any other file comparison tool.
I think this is a pretty opinionated question to ask. Fedora came out of the Redhat project, I believe around the time Redhat had "dropped" desktop users in favor of their "enterprise" userbase. It is a "community" project. Ubuntu is based on Debian, and aims to be easy for non-technical users. OpenSuSE is again a "community" distribution out of the ...
I really like /usr/ports. This isn't to say that I don't also really like apt-get, but it's a pleasing feeling to know that your installs are being built on and for your particular machine, with any optimizations you felt like throwing into the makefile defaults. How much of the perceived benefit of that is superstition, I haven't done the research to find ...
As a Java developer, the big gotcha is there is no mainstream JVM for *BSD. Before everyone flames me out of existence, what I mean is, there is no current shipping JDK from Sun or any of the other major vendors (IBM, BEA/Oracle) so you will always be playing second fiddle to linux and window users.
*BSD is a complete OS, meaning the kernel and the userland is developed from the same source tree, whereas Linux distributions are butchered together from various sources. This is why BSD systems feel much more cohesive and solid. Also better documented.
Just a few issues: Pro (Free)BSD: ZFS filesystem/volume management Dtrace for tracing/analysis Excellent and easy to find documentation (FreeBSD Handbook, OpenBSD FAQ, Manual pages are really good and do actually have useful examples) Clean and rock solid OS release upgrade process Separation of the core OS from other software ("Ports collection") BSD ...
We develop for CentOS because it's compatible with RHEL, which is among the most commercially supported distros. When ISVs produce Linux versions of anything (apps, binary kernel drivers, etc), chances are good it'll be supported on RHEL first. For that reason alone, we stick with the most common.
In the end, you're the one that has to secure it. As such, the one you know how to secure properly is the best choice.
It sounds like your plan is to determine what DC has the latest changes, and then make them on another DC? No no no no no. This will backfire. AD doesn't replicate by what changes are consistent with each other, it replicates by latest serial number. What you need to do is fix replication. Depending on your version of Windows (you didn't tell us; it would ...
I'm a Debian man, so the below may be slightly biased towards Debian. They'll both perform the same and when you compare CentOS + EPEL with Debian + Backports, the package repositories are about as diverse as each other. Debian has a slightly shorter release cycle, so you'll get newer packages more often. It's really down to your personal choice. If ...
Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible