Re: "Torn between two OS" - Solaris vs Linux
From: Lawrence D'Oliveiro (ldo_at_geek-central.gen.new_zealand)
Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 16:29:03 +1300
In article <Pine.SOL.4.58.0412201151480.19783@zaphod>,
Rich Teer <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>On Mon, 20 Dec 2004, natG wrote:
>> How much ram (estimate) do I save by using cde? I would use this mode
>> for a machine dedicated for a j2ee or sql server.
>That one is easy: servers shouldn't be running a GUI, so neither
>is required or should be installed.
>> What Samba does in Linux. From a Windows machine as client, I can browse
>Samba is just an application. It works just the same on Solaris
>as it does on Linux.
Under Linux you have smbfs, which gives you access to Samba server
volumes as though they were local volumes.
>> Samba negates the need for nfs, even amongst Linux systems,
>Heh. NFS predates SMB by quite a few years. If Microsoft had
>decided to adopt an open, free, standard (NFS) back then, Sambe
>wouldn't even exist. Of course, interoperability and Microsoft
>don't usually belong in the same senstence...
NFS is elderly and creaky. The only reason it's still used is because of
sheer inertia. Like that other Sun invention, NIS, it is very definitely
a product of the 1980s, back when you could trust all the machines on