Re: Help, OSX vs Linux

From: Aaron Cimolini (aaroncimolini_at_yahoo.com)
Date: 10/05/03

  • Next message: moseley_at_hank.org: "Mplayer eating all CPU" 
    Date: Sat, 4 Oct 2003 21:24:31 -0700 (PDT)
To: "debian-user@lists.debian.org" <debian-user@lists.debian.org>

    Hey Mike,

    Sounds like you are looking for some weight for your
    argument that debian is the best. For some apps yes!
    But in a situation with these macs you may be better
    off getting a mix of OSX servers and some debian boxes
    for the PCs.

    I have worked with OS X server version 10.1.4 and it
    was unstable as hell, had huge problems if it wansnt
    running DNS or didnt have a name server on its local
    network (so bad that it would lock us out of the
    machine randomly). I aslo saw some it produce a stop
    screen that made me appreciate how nice the shade of
    blue a MS stop screen looked like.

    In the end however the system did get up and running
    and hasnt had any problems since. Running as a
    file/web server.

    OS X.2 jaguar is the latest version of the mac os.
    With it you can install fink a port of apt and
    dselect, with which you can install all sorts of unix
    packages all compiled and configured to run under OS
    X. You can also install X windows server and client to
    run Xapps in their own windows along side the apple
    apps (very trick).

    OS X also uses the NetInfo database for much of its
    authentication/configuration data. Its sort of like a
    cross between the MS registry and Active Directory.

    OS X is not the endallbeall of server OSs but it is a
    huge jump from what OS 9 was. Consider taking a second
    look at it. It may fill your needs perfectly,
    specially with fink ;-)

    http://fink.sourceforge.net

    Aaron

    --- Mike Egglestone <mike@heri.sd57.bc.ca> wrote:
    > Hi All,
    >
    > I'm a system's admin looking after several different
    > sites at
    > which most of them have woody servers. But some of
    > the staff are
    > pushing for OSX servers. The workstations range from
    > PC's to Imacs.
    > running all different OS's.
    > I'm finding it difficult to convince them that OSX
    > is not the way to go.
    > We all know the reasons why Debian is so Great, but
    > they can't see it.
    > The biggest push is that the OSX server can have
    > workgroups for accounts and
    > thus lock workstations so that only certain
    > workgroups have access to certain
    > applications on OS 9.x machines.
    > I use netatalk currently, and use local multiple
    > users on OS 9 to lock down
    > the machine but its not quite as tight as how OSX
    > server can do it with Mac
    > Mananger.
    > I love the fact the Debian has apt-get and I can
    > quickly install the daemons
    > such as squid, exim, apache, samba, netatalk,
    > dhcp,ipmasq and so many other
    > great things. Supposedly, OSX can run and do all
    > this too, correct?
    > The only reasons I can think of that makes Debian
    > better is that is Free, its
    > more stable, and its way faster.
    > Are there any other benefits of debian that out way
    > it from OSX?
    >
    > Your ideas and comments are appreciated!
    >
    > Thanks
    > Mike
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > -------------------------------------------------
    > This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/
    >
    >
    > --
    > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
    > debian-user-request@lists.debian.org
    > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact
    > listmaster@lists.debian.org
    >

    __________________________________
    Do you Yahoo!?
    The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search
    http://shopping.yahoo.com 

    -- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-request@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
  • Next message: moseley_at_hank.org: "Mplayer eating all CPU"

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: Over 100 bug fixes coming!!!
      ... fixes to users of the company's Leopard operating system. ... Mac OS X server came out in 1999. ... OSX Server didn't come out until the Summer of 2001. ...
      (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
    • Re: Help, OSX vs Linux
      ... > argument that debian is the best. ... I was looking for some weight. ... Firstly, the server must support the multiplatform world, which OSX and Linux ...
      (Debian-User)
    • Re: SBS and Mac OSX 10.4
      ... This document does not work on OSX 10.4, when trying any of the first commands listed on the first few pages the terminal shows errors. ... The clients seem to be able to access the shares fine but I guess stuff needs to be set up because we are using .local, at least that's what I understand. ... If you're able to connect to shares with the IP address but not the server name, this means that you're still having DNS configuration issues on the Mac. ...
      (microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs)
    • Re: White Box /RHEL 3 on a Mac?
      ... ppc linux has it's ups and downs as much as anything else. ... so machines all said) and i was able to get YDL and debian, ... openbsd on to macs ranging from 6500's and 9500's, ANS server, to Blue ... the debate above about the Mac OS is relative to using it as ...
      (Fedora)
    • Re: Cant connect OSX 10.3 & OS9 clients to same Win2k Share
      ... However we have some new OSX machines that do don't ... the UAM will only apply to AFP connections that you make. ... Mac OS X's version of SMB will split the Mac ... OS 9 clients won't be able to read the two files as one from the server. ...
      (microsoft.public.win2000.macintosh)