An unofficial blog that watches Google's attempts to move your operating system online since 2005. Not affiliated with Google.

Send your tips to

June 7, 2006

Windows 2003 Server Better Than Linux?

Yankee Group has made a realiability survey and found that Windows 2003 Server is a more reliable server operating system than Linux. Windows 2003 server has 20 percent more uptime than Red Hat Enterprise Linux, but HP-UX and Sun Solaris have more uptime than Windows 2003 Server.

Yankee Group offers a reason for the problem: "the scarcity of Linux and open source documentation".

Surprisingly, the survey wasn't sponsored by Microsoft, but was made by Laura DiDio, who is often viewed as being very critical of the Open Source movement and community. You can see her in a video hosted by Microsoft.


  1. I have been doing research in the fiel dof dependability for an european project on OSes. I can say that Linux is fault tolerant and the time to see a bug fix is shorter than ยต$oft operating system. I'm not surprised to see this kind of "group" publishing results with no scientific method explained.

  2. Well, it doesn't have to be entirely false. I mean, Linux is a kernel, Red Hat is a distro.

    Much more important would be which versions of which applications were used, rather than which distro and which kernel.

    Both the windows kernel and the linux kernel are very stable nowadays for server-purposes (that is, don't load any kernel-module / driver than you don't need)

    I disagree with the statement about documentation though. People that claim there is more windows documentation than linux documentation are most likely the type of people that go to the library to get a book about the internet.

    Yes, there is more info about windows on the internet. But most is of 12 year old script kiddies explaining how to install some crack for their current game of choice. In the bookstore or the library its a different discussion. But books suck. If you can explain something in 3 sentences you can't sell a book now can you? You have to take at least 300 pages, to explain the exact same thing. Perhaps i'm just too young and should have more respect for the oldies that just don't know how to really use a search enigne.

    And if you're one of those, here's a first hint. You're looking for supoprt information. Something should be working but it isn't. Lets call it X. You google for: Why the fuck doesn't X work. Then you'll get about 100 forum results of frustrated people asking the same questions and getting _replies_.

    So for the treasure of documentation is the search-engine plus the forums. And those you have a lot more of for Linux.

  3. I m 100% agree with the opinion that Linux have less/dispersed documentation. This sucks.
    Suppose I am doing application programming in VC++... I will have lots of help avilable without looking on to the net.. This is surely not possible in Linux..

  4. I agree with the opinion the both kernels are very stable if you don't add extra modules. However in Linux it is easier to throw out all unneded modules. You can just recompile the kernel without them.

    I also agree that programming in VC++ under linux is a little bit harder then under Windows. That's why you should try eclipse (cdt)/emacs/kdevelop..:)

  5. Linux is much better than windows
    here are some reasons

    Linux has a user/system privileges
    With a root account which gives all
    You all access to your computer files and change settings
    Then you have a user account that can manage your files

    Q. Is there more servers runing windows or linux.
    A. There is by far more servers running linux that windows
    Linux is more stable
    and has better web serving
    There are not s many viruses for

    There you go Linux is better
    And I will always use it on servers
    and desktop and/or laptop


Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.