BBS水木清华站∶精华区

发信人: MrX (毛线球), 信区: Linux
标  题: Another attack to linux from M$.
发信站: BBS 水木清华站 (Tue Jan 11 18:13:59 2000)

From http://www.microsoft.com/ntserver/nts/news/msnw/LinuxMyths.asp

With all the recent attention around Linux as an operating system, it's imp
ortant to step back from the hype and look at the reality. First, it's worth
noting that Linux is a UNIX-like operating system. Linux fundamentally reli
es on 30-year-old operating system technology and architecture. Linux was no
t designed from the ground-up to support symmetrical multiprocessing (SMP),
graphical user interfaces (GUI), asynchronous I/O, fine-grained security mod
el, and many other important characteristics of a modern operating system. T
hese architectural limitations mean that as customers look for a platform to
cost effectively deploy scalable, secure, and robust applications, Linux si
mply cannot deliver on the hype.
Myth: Linux performs better than Windows NT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Reality: Windows NT 4.0 Outperforms Linux On Common Customer Workloads
The Linux community claims to have improved performance and scalability in t
he latest versions of the Linux Kernel (2.2), however it's clear that Linux
remains inferior to the Windows NT? 4.0 operating system.
For File and Print services, according to independent tests conducted by PC
Week Labs, the Windows NT 4.0 operating system delivers 52 percent better pe
rformance on a single processor system and 110 percent better performance on
a 4-way system than similarly configured single processor and 4-way Linux/S
AMBA systems.
For Web servers, the same PC Week tests showed Windows NT 4.0 with Internet
Information Server 4.0 delivers 41 percent better performance on a single pr
ocessor system and 125 percent better performance on a 4-way system than Lin
ux and Apache.
For e-commerce workloads using secure sockets (SSL), recent PC Magazine test
s showed Windows NT 4.0 with Internet Information Server 4.0 delivers approx
imately five times the performance provided by Linux and Stronghold.
For transaction-orientated Line of Business applications, Windows NT 4.0 has
achieved a result of 40,368 tpmC at a cost of $18.46 per transaction on a C
ompaq 8-Way Pentium III XEON processor-based system. This industry leading p
rice/performance result from the Transaction Processing Performance Council
(TPC) clearly shows how Windows NT can deliver world-class performance for h
eavy duty transaction processing. It's interesting to note that there is not
a single TPC result on any database running on Linux, and therefore Linux h
as yet to demonstrate their capabilities as a database server.
Linux performance and scalability is architecturally limited in the 2.2 Kern
el. Linux only supports 2 gigabytes (GB) of RAM on the x86 architecture,1 co
mpared to 4 GB for Windows NT 4.0. The largest file size Linux supports is 2
GB versus 16 terabytes (TB) for Windows NT 4.0. The Linux SWAP file is limi
ted to 128 MB. In addition, Linux does not support many of the modern operat
ing system features that Windows NT 4.0 has pioneered such as asynchronous I
/O, completion ports, and fine-grained kernel locks. These architecture cons
traints limit the ability of Linux to scale well past two processors.
The Linux community continues to promise major SMP and performance improveme
nts. They have been promising these since the development of the 2.0 Kernel
in 1996. Delivering a scalable system is a complex task and it's not clear t
hat the Linux community can solve these issues easily or quickly. As D. H. B
rown Associates noted in a recent technical report,2 the Linux 2.2 Kernel re
mains in the early stages of providing a tuned SMP kernel.
Myth: Linux is more reliable than Windows NT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Reality: Linux Needs Real World Proof Points Rather than Anecdotal Stories
The Linux community likes to talk about Linux as a stable and reliable opera
ting system, yet there are no real world data or metrics and very limited cu
stomer evidence to back up these claims.
Windows NT 4.0 has been proven in demanding customer environments to be a re
liable operating system. Customers such as Barnes and Noble, The Boeing Comp
any, Chicago Stock Exchange, Dell Computer, Nasdaq and many others run missi
on-critical applications on Windows NT 4.0.
Linux lacks a commercial quality Journaling File System. This means that in
the event of a system failure (such as a power outage) data loss or corrupti
on is possible. In any event, the system must check the integrity of the fil
e system during system restart, a process that will likely consume an extend
ed amount of time, especially on large volumes and may require manual interv
ention to reconstruct the file system.
There are no commercially proven clustering technologies to provide High Ava
ilability for Linux. The Linux community may point to numerous projects and
small companies that are aiming to deliver High Availability functionality.
D. H. Brown recently noted that these offerings remain immature and largely
unproven in the demanding business world.
There are no OEMs that provide uptime guarantees for Linux, unlike Windows N
T where Compaq, Data General, Hewlett-Packard, IBM, and Unisys provide 99.9
percent system-level uptime guarantees for Windows NT-based servers.
Myth: Linux is Free
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Reality: Free Operating System Does Not Mean Low Total Cost of Ownership
The Linux community will talk about the free or low-cost nature of Linux. It
's important to understand that licensing cost is only a small part of the o
verall decision-making process for customers.
The cost of the operating system is only a small percentage of the overall t
otal cost of ownership (TCO). In general Windows NT has proven to have a low
er cost of ownership than UNIX. Previous studies have shown that Windows NT
has 37 percent lower TCO than UNIX. There is no reason to believe that Linux
is significantly different than other versions of UNIX when it comes to TCO
.
The very definition of Linux as an Open Software effort means that commercia
l companies like Red Hat will make money by charging for services. Therefore
, commercial support services for Linux will be fee-based and will likely be
priced at a premium. These costs have to be factored into the total cost mo
del.
Linux is a UNIX-like operating system and is therefore complex to configure
and manage. Existing UNIX users may find the transition to Linux easier but
administrators for existing Windows?-based or Novell environments will find
it more difficult to handle the complexity of Linux. This retraining will ad
d significant costs to Linux deployments.
Linux is a higher risk option than Windows NT. For example how many certifie
d engineers are there for Linux? How easy is it to find skilled development
and support people for Linux? Who performs end-to-end testing for Linux-base
d solutions? These factors and more need to be taken into account when choos
ing a platform for your business.
Myth: Linux is more secure than Windows NT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Reality: Linux Security Model Is Weak
All systems are vulnerable to security issues, however it's important to not
e that Linux uses the same security model as the original UNIX implementatio
ns--a model that was not designed from the ground up to be secure.
Linux only provides access controls for files and directories. In contrast,
every object in Windows NT, from files to operating system data structures,
has an access control list and its use can be regulated as appropriate.
Linux security is all-or-nothing. Administrators cannot delegate administrat
ive privileges: a user who needs any administrative capability must be made
a full administrator, which compromises best security practices. In contrast
, Windows NT allows an administrator to delegate privileges at an exceptiona
lly fine-grained level.
Linux has not supported key security accreditation standards. Every member o
f the Windows NT family since Windows NT 3.5 has been evaluated at either a
C2 level under the U.S. Government's evaluation process or at a C2-equivalen
t level under the British Government's ITSEC process. In contrast, no Linux
products are listed on the U.S. Government's evaluated product list.
Linux system administrators must spend huge amounts of time understanding th
e latest Linux bugs and determining what to do about them. This is made comp
lex due to the fact that there isn't a central location for security issues
to be reported and fixed. In contrast Microsoft provides a single security r
epository for notification and fixes of security related issues.
Configuring Linux security requires an administrator to be an expert in the
intricacies of the operating system and how components interact. Misconfigur
e any part of the operating system and the system could be vulnerable to att
ack. Windows NT security is easy to set up and administer with tools such as
the Security Configuration Editor.
Myth: Linux can replace Windows on the desktop
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Reality: Linux Makes No Sense at the Desktop
Linux as a desktop operating system makes no sense. A user would end up with
a system that has fewer applications, is more complex to use and manage, an
d is less intuitive.
Linux does not provide support for the broad range of hardware in use today;
Windows NT 4.0 currently supports over 39,000 systems and devices on the Ha
rdware Compatibility List. Linux does not support important ease-of-use tech
nologies such as Plug and Play, USB, and Power Management
The complexity of the Linux operating system and cumbersome nature of the ex
isting GUIs would make retraining end-users a huge undertaking and would add
significant cost
Linux application support is very limited, meaning that customers end up hav
ing to build their own horizontal and vertical applications. A recent report
from Forrester Research highlighted the fact that today 93 percent of enter
prise ISVs develop applications for Windows NT, while only 13 percent develo
p for Linux.3
Summary
The Linux operating system is not suitable for mainstream usage by business
or home users. Today with Windows NT 4.0, customers can be confident in deli
vering applications that are scalable, secure, and reliable--yet cost effect
ive to deploy and manage. Linux clearly has a long way to go to be competiti
ve with Windows NT 4.0. With the release of the Windows 2000 operating syste
m, Microsoft extends the technical superiority of the platform even further
ensuring that customers can deliver the next generation applications to solv
e their business challenges.
More information
Customer Testimonials
See how these leading companies and organizations have deployed Windows NT S
erver 4.0:
Nasdaq
Barnes & Noble
Dell Computer Corp
The Boeing Company
Chicago Stock Exchange
Performance Data
See Industry Benchmarks Show Windows NT Server 4.0 Outperforms Linux
Footnotes
1. Siemens & SuSE announced a patch in September 1999 to extend to 4 GB, alt
hough this is not part of the 2.2 Kernel or major distributions.
2. Linux: How Good Is It? D. H. Brown Associates Inc. April 1999
3. Forrester Research, Software Vendors Crown Server OS Kings, Aug. 31, 1999

--
    __ _
   / /(_)_ __  _   ___  __   MrX (LordX)
  / / | | '_ \| | | \ \/ /   OpenICQ ID: 292109
/ /__| | | | | |_| |>  <
\____/_|_| |_|\__,_/_/\_\    LordX@chinaren.com

※ 来源:·BBS 水木清华站 smth.org·[FROM: 166.111.64.190]