On Mon, 19 Apr 1999, Fred Read wrote:
> > If we were to opt
> > for a Unix-based solution, it would have to be built using professional
> > tools, such as a ColdFusion application server and/or an Oracle/Informix
> > SQL database. These alone would raise the cost of ERes by 3 to 5 to 8
> > K. And that doesn't count the fact that the actually development of the
> > system is much more straightforward using VBSCript, etc., which keeps our
> > development costs down.
> Isn't Informix for Linux free?
And Oracle for Linux is dirt cheap.. a couple hundred, I believe. I've
managed to pull off a lot of relatively massive databases using MySQL, and
have had few problems. And the few that I did, got plenty of feedback
almost instantly (from this exact list, actually, as well as a couple
> > I should also note that the performance of an NT system will be way more
> > than sufficient for an application such as ERes. And at least in our
> > experience, NT offers better security: while 3 of systems running under
> > Linux have been hacked in the last 9 months, we have had no reports of
> > problems from our sites running under NT.
> How could anyone with any knowledge of the subject say NT offers better
> security than Linux? [Did someone say Back Orifice???]
Stock Linux systems that aren't properly maintained are easy to hack, 'coz
there's lots of bugs and plenty of readily available scripts to use on
'em. Even poorly maintained NT servers are less vulnerable to script
kiddies, even though they are more vulnerable to more sophisticated
attacks and more experienced people. This is only a temporary situation,
which will rapidly change as more holes are found. Remember, it was only
a few months ago that NT based buffer overflows were brought to the point
when arbitrary code could be executed...
That's an opinion, feel free to argue with me.
river styx internet