545 lines
18 KiB
HTML
545 lines
18 KiB
HTML
|
|
<!--startcut ==========================================================-->
|
|
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
|
|
<HTML>
|
|
<HEAD>
|
|
<title>Linux and Windows95 Issue 25</title>
|
|
</HEAD>
|
|
<BODY BGCOLOR="#FFFFFF" TEXT="#000000" LINK="#0000FF" VLINK="#A000A0"
|
|
ALINK="#FF0000">
|
|
<!--endcut ============================================================-->
|
|
|
|
<H4>
|
|
"Linux Gazette...<I>making Linux just a little more fun!</I>"
|
|
</H4>
|
|
|
|
<P> <HR> <P>
|
|
<!--===================================================================-->
|
|
|
|
<center>
|
|
<H2>Linux and Windows 95<br>
|
|
The Best Bang for Your Buck</H2>
|
|
<H4>By <a href="mailto:leo@iems.nwu.edu">Leonardo Lopes</a></H4>
|
|
</center>
|
|
<P> <HR> <P>
|
|
|
|
Many Linux users tend to think of
|
|
Windows95 as a competitor to Linux. In
|
|
mailing lists and in Usenet it is common
|
|
to encounter comments that portray
|
|
Windows95 as the materialization of
|
|
evil and Linux as the savior of all
|
|
cybernetic souls. While it is my belief
|
|
that only a small portion of the Linux
|
|
community believes the source of all
|
|
darkness is Redmond, it is easy to get
|
|
caught by passion and forget to
|
|
analyze this situation through a more
|
|
technical light, which would definitely be
|
|
more productive in promoting the
|
|
growth of Linux, through it's own merits.
|
|
|
|
<p>Of course Microsoft has thrown more
|
|
than it's share of low blows over the
|
|
years. But it is hard for me to believe
|
|
that any other company in the position
|
|
Microsoft was in would act much
|
|
differently. And in any case, the Linux
|
|
community has nothing to gain by
|
|
confronting the Goliaths of the software
|
|
business in any field except the
|
|
technical one. The media attention we
|
|
have received lately is totally funded on
|
|
the quality of Linux, which by the way
|
|
separates us clearly from the pack.
|
|
This attention will only grow in the
|
|
future, especially if we present
|
|
ourselves as mature albeit idealistic
|
|
developers, which most of us are.
|
|
|
|
<p>We know all too well that Windows95
|
|
and it's applications are not as stable
|
|
as we would like, that support is very
|
|
poor and expensive, how inflexible and
|
|
insecure it is, and all the other perils
|
|
that plague it. People in charge of
|
|
supporting it are familiar with error
|
|
messages like: "Consult an Expert" and
|
|
"Reinstall Windows95".
|
|
<p>
|
|
But if you can put up with that, what
|
|
you have is an extraordinary operating
|
|
system: It is very easy to use, install
|
|
and configure; It is inexpensive; It has
|
|
impressive internationalization support;
|
|
it has excellent development tools; it is
|
|
supported by nearly every major
|
|
hardware manufacturer; not to mention
|
|
the tremendous amount of high quality
|
|
software available in almost every
|
|
category for the platform.
|
|
<p>
|
|
Linux, on the other hand, has a
|
|
different set of advantages. It is rock
|
|
solid, has excellent support, is
|
|
extremely flexible and secure, is free, is
|
|
open, and so on. From a technical point
|
|
of view, it is incomparably superior to
|
|
Windows95.
|
|
<p>
|
|
The problem is that companies have
|
|
invested billions of dollars in software
|
|
and training for the Windows platform.
|
|
And Linux does not run Powerpoint, or
|
|
MS Word, or Delphi. Also, most end
|
|
users will not take advantage of the
|
|
extra flexibility and security offered by
|
|
Linux. It is not that they have no use for
|
|
it, it is just that they are so used to
|
|
working with what they have, and so
|
|
wary of changes, that they don't really
|
|
care about the advantages they may
|
|
get. It is sad, but true: They would
|
|
rather not save sensitive information
|
|
than learn about permissions; They are
|
|
so used to rebooting their machine all
|
|
the time that it has become as frivolous
|
|
as clicking a mouse button.
|
|
<p>
|
|
Most end-users spend the whole day
|
|
performing parametric transactions on
|
|
their machines. In many cases, even
|
|
management will prefer to wait days or
|
|
weeks for their IS department to
|
|
prepare a GUI interface to a query than
|
|
to learn SQL and get the information
|
|
immediately. Of course I and many
|
|
people use Linux for most of my
|
|
personal computing needs. When I use
|
|
Windows95, I really miss the things we
|
|
take for granted in Linux, like powerful
|
|
command line tools, permissions,
|
|
stability, etc... But unfortunately most
|
|
users are not like that nor are they
|
|
likely to be.
|
|
<p>
|
|
Linux is best exactly where Windows is
|
|
lacking. It is strong in support for
|
|
different software platforms. It is
|
|
designed to be sturdy and take heavy
|
|
workloads day in day out. It has
|
|
marvelous internet tools, and picks up
|
|
the security buck where Windows
|
|
passes it. Nobody wants a web server
|
|
or for that matter any server in which
|
|
you can't have 100% confidence on.
|
|
<p>
|
|
For all these reasons, looking at Linux
|
|
as an alternative to Windows95 is in my
|
|
opinion a mistake. It's greatest potential
|
|
will be achieved as a server and
|
|
manager for Windows, complementing
|
|
Windows' weaknesses and
|
|
guaranteeing a high level of service to
|
|
the enterprises who select it. If at all
|
|
possible, it's generally a good idea that
|
|
end users don't even know -- or need
|
|
to know -- that it's Linux that is offering
|
|
the advanced services they're using.
|
|
<p>
|
|
That having been said, the natural
|
|
competitors to Linux become Windows
|
|
NT and other unices. So let's see why it
|
|
is by far the natural choice for this role.
|
|
<p>
|
|
In every step of the initial cost equation
|
|
you will be saving money with Linux. To
|
|
begin with it is free, or almost free if
|
|
you want to take into account the cost
|
|
of a distribution. Then It requires far
|
|
less computer resources than it's
|
|
competitors, and you'll also save money
|
|
there. Also it will often eliminate or
|
|
reduce the need for additional
|
|
equipment, especially when compared
|
|
to NT. Then it is portable to several
|
|
platforms. So instead of supporting NT,
|
|
Solaris, Ultrix and AIX, each with it's
|
|
own expenses in training,
|
|
documentation, etc..., now you only
|
|
have to support Linux. That aspect
|
|
alone can save thousands of dollars
|
|
every month to an organization.
|
|
<p>
|
|
With regard to software, not only you
|
|
will find almost every type of software
|
|
you may need for free or very
|
|
inexpensively, but bugs are corrected
|
|
and new features are added with
|
|
incredible agility. No more of that "it will
|
|
be fixed in the next release" talk. And
|
|
since almost everything comes with
|
|
source code, if your organization needs
|
|
a feature with great urgency, it is much
|
|
easier to add it than with a closed box
|
|
OS. That is not to mention the speed
|
|
with which Linux itself is updated.
|
|
Security holes and bugs are quickly
|
|
tracked and fixed, frequently in a matter
|
|
of hours. Nobody can put a price tag on
|
|
that.
|
|
<p>
|
|
Probably the biggest difference
|
|
between Linux and it's competitors is in
|
|
support and documentation. No, it is
|
|
not commonplace yet to have your
|
|
Linux vendor put you on hold for half
|
|
an hour to charge you big bucks for
|
|
online support like the other guys. And
|
|
yes, there are situations in which online
|
|
support is indispensable. But there are
|
|
already options for online support for
|
|
Linux, a business which has everything
|
|
to grow considerably as Linux invades
|
|
the corporate market. And in an
|
|
emergency, putting a Linux server up
|
|
and running can be done much faster
|
|
than any of it's competitors. In fact, in
|
|
many cases you can have a spare hard
|
|
disk laying around for an eventuality. If
|
|
you need it, pop open just about any
|
|
PC, stick the disk in there, turn the
|
|
machine on and go. Also, if you want to
|
|
really do things right, the low setup and
|
|
maintenance cost makes redundant
|
|
solutions using Linux much more
|
|
interesting than with any other OS. And
|
|
that is not to mention that a lot of
|
|
people, including probably the people
|
|
who will be in charge of maintaining
|
|
Linux at work, use or will use Linux at
|
|
home. How many people you know use
|
|
Ultrix or even NT at home?
|
|
<p>
|
|
If your business is connected to the
|
|
internet, you will get an infinite
|
|
knowledge base, always willing to help,
|
|
generally for free. Antagonists will say:
|
|
"Other OSs have their own mailing lists
|
|
and Usenet groups too." But the fact is
|
|
that no other internet support group is
|
|
even closely as effective as Linux's.
|
|
Linux is unique in that it offers many
|
|
more tools to fix your problems. It
|
|
doesn't matter how big a guru you may
|
|
be, if the software you use is not
|
|
traceable by a debugger and doesn't
|
|
come with source, you will not be able
|
|
to get answers as fast and as easily.
|
|
And there is a "positive spiral", as Bill
|
|
Gates would like to define it, with Linux
|
|
support: A lot of people learned a lot of
|
|
what they know through the Linux
|
|
internet support channels. Now they
|
|
feel in many ways obliged to help lots
|
|
of other people. Who will learn a lot of
|
|
what they will now through these
|
|
channels. And so on.
|
|
<p>
|
|
Linux documentation is incomparable to
|
|
any other OS's. Not only in quantity,
|
|
quality and price, but also in that it is so
|
|
frequently updated. From novice users
|
|
to accomplished network
|
|
administrators, it is more than likely that
|
|
you will find most of the answers you
|
|
need from the documentation that
|
|
comes with your distribution or with the
|
|
CDs that accompany it. If you don't find
|
|
it there, it is almost always somewhere
|
|
in the internet, reachable by any search
|
|
engine. More and more books are
|
|
published every month about Linux.
|
|
There are monthly publications like
|
|
Linux Journal and Linux Gazette
|
|
available. There are tutorials, howtos,
|
|
faqs and other documents describing
|
|
every single detail of the operating
|
|
system, and most of the software that
|
|
comes with it. And that is not to
|
|
mention the inheritance of over 20
|
|
years of UNIX expertise and
|
|
information. In total, the amount saved
|
|
with support and documentation
|
|
expenses every day with Linux can add
|
|
up considerably.
|
|
<p>
|
|
Administrative costs are also much
|
|
lower in Linux, and administration is
|
|
much easier on Linux than in any other
|
|
OS. An argument many people use in
|
|
favor of NT is that it is so easy to
|
|
administrate. A lot of UNIX people were
|
|
at first fearful of losing their jobs when
|
|
NT came out. Now, how many NT sites
|
|
you know don't have a dedicated
|
|
administrator? The fallacy of Microsoft's
|
|
argumentation is that administrative
|
|
costs are not affected by creating new
|
|
users in a GUI instead of using a shell
|
|
script, or even editing a file. They are
|
|
not affected by day to day operations
|
|
when things go <b> right</b>, and they are not
|
|
affected by performing ordinary
|
|
maintenance. What really skyrockets
|
|
your administrative costs is when things
|
|
go <b>wrong</b>. And anyone supporting
|
|
networks knows that they do. With any
|
|
system. And when that happens, you
|
|
need clear error messages. You need
|
|
trace and debug capabilities. And you
|
|
need documentation. And Linux offers
|
|
all these items in great generosity,
|
|
much more than NT and more than
|
|
most other unices.
|
|
<p>
|
|
Another factor that increases your
|
|
administration costs is when you have
|
|
to do anything that is out of the
|
|
ordinary. When that happens, you want
|
|
flexibility. And while NT may be
|
|
acceptable for cooking pasta, finer
|
|
dishes will require tools and flexibility
|
|
you can only get from UNIX. Because
|
|
Linux is so flexible, you can frequently
|
|
eliminate routers, bridges, and other
|
|
equipment which not only add to
|
|
additional hardware cost, but also
|
|
contribute to make your network more
|
|
complex, introduce new environments
|
|
to be learned, and become yet another
|
|
failure point. With Linux, cost involved
|
|
in the maintenance of these
|
|
equipments can often be eliminated,
|
|
and other times, greatly reduced.
|
|
|
|
<H4>Getting To the Point -- Integrating Linux and Windows95</H4>
|
|
|
|
<p>Using Linux with Windows95 is not a
|
|
very complicated task. Most of the work
|
|
is handled by the Samba suite, a host
|
|
of programs designed to work with the
|
|
SMB protocol, capable of most services
|
|
you expect from a network server:
|
|
Handling logins, sharing hard drives,
|
|
printers, etc... Samba is especially
|
|
useful when you have a mixed
|
|
UNIX/Windows95 environment, like we
|
|
did at the Mathematics Department at
|
|
UFC. When people logged on any
|
|
Windows machine, they would have
|
|
access to their home directories at the
|
|
H: drive. This brought up an
|
|
administrative problem, as people
|
|
quickly took up all the hard drive space
|
|
available installing Windows programs
|
|
in their H: drives. Nothing that a quota
|
|
system won't fix.
|
|
<p>
|
|
Samba fools your Windows95 machine
|
|
into thinking that it is talking to a NT
|
|
server. You can have network profiles,
|
|
unified registries for all your machines,
|
|
run login scripts, and generally have
|
|
most of the bells and whistles available
|
|
with NT. [See earlier issue of Linux
|
|
Journal]. It is one of the best supported
|
|
and documented programs available.
|
|
The only problem I had is that logins
|
|
take a little longer to complete, when
|
|
compared to NT. It is generally a little
|
|
slower than NT, but perfectly usable.
|
|
The configuration files have a format
|
|
similar to the Windows .ini files. You
|
|
can use it to share printers, hard disks,
|
|
cdroms, etc... According to the
|
|
documentation, there is no real reason
|
|
why other mass storage peripherals
|
|
shouldn't work, although I haven't tried
|
|
any.
|
|
<p>
|
|
At PCC Inform=E1tica, a computer retailer
|
|
at which I installed an intranet based on
|
|
a sole Linux server, I also installed
|
|
HylaFax, an excellent fax server. It was
|
|
not as simple to install, mainly because
|
|
it asks so many questions that it can
|
|
scare you. If you take your time to
|
|
answer them, especially with the aid of
|
|
your Modem's manual, it should be no
|
|
big deal. Also it searches for some
|
|
programs which you will not find in
|
|
most distributions. For instance, it
|
|
asked me for mawk, which I
|
|
symbolically linked to gawk, and never
|
|
had any problems. The Windows95
|
|
Hylafax client, whfc, works reasonably
|
|
well, although it is not quite stable
|
|
enough for everyday use, and lacks
|
|
important features, like job scheduling. I
|
|
contacted the author, but he was busy
|
|
with other projects, and told me that he
|
|
could not release the source code
|
|
because of limitations by his employer.
|
|
HylaFax is so richly documented I
|
|
decided to implement my own client,
|
|
with the specific needs of my
|
|
organization. As soon as I get a couple
|
|
of machines, I will start doing that. Any
|
|
volunteers?
|
|
<p>
|
|
Mail came mostly configured. Not only
|
|
sendmail was configured correctly
|
|
almost right out of the box, but a pop
|
|
server also already came installed. All I
|
|
had to do in Windows95 was install a
|
|
major browser.
|
|
<p>
|
|
Information about products is created
|
|
on regular Windows95 programs, then
|
|
converted to HTML and made available
|
|
for the intranet at the Linux server.
|
|
Tutorials and documentation for
|
|
installed programs available in HTML
|
|
are also available from the server.
|
|
<p>
|
|
The Linux machine at PCC Inform=E1tica
|
|
also has the responsibility of doing IP
|
|
Masquerading for the whole network of
|
|
22 machines and counting. I had to get
|
|
the newest stable kernel at the time
|
|
(2.0.29), and a patch for it to work with
|
|
ftp.. Even in this kernel, the help
|
|
message on the configure script will say
|
|
that masquerading is experimental
|
|
code. I never had any problems,
|
|
running the machine under the
|
|
conditions above. Once the kernel was
|
|
recompiled, all I had to do was add two
|
|
calls to ipfwadm and I was all set. I had
|
|
invaluable help from the people in the
|
|
internet for this task. The Brazilian linux
|
|
mailing list linux-br, an Issue of Linux
|
|
Journal, the kernel documentation, web
|
|
documentation, were all useful tools for
|
|
me to get this job done.
|
|
<p>
|
|
Telecommunications in Brazil is very
|
|
expensive. At the time we were
|
|
planning this network, our first thought
|
|
was on getting a 64k leased line from
|
|
the company to our service provider.
|
|
That would cost us around US$1050 a
|
|
month, only on telephone company
|
|
charges. So we decided to build a new
|
|
machine, install it at our service
|
|
provider and put in it our web content,
|
|
ftp server and mail server. The
|
|
company would then access the
|
|
internet via a dial-up account, which
|
|
would cost us only US$210 a month.
|
|
Since dial-up calls tend to fail a lot, I
|
|
made a simple script which would
|
|
check if the line was ok, calling the
|
|
service provider again in case the line
|
|
had dropped. Also this script mailed my
|
|
outside account the current IP number
|
|
for the machine, in case I needed to
|
|
access it from somewhere else in the
|
|
internet. Then I put the script to run
|
|
every 5 minutes with crontab. Simple
|
|
and agile. In other words, low
|
|
administration costs. If the bandwidth
|
|
required increased sufficiently, it would
|
|
be easy to add a second modem and
|
|
use equal line balancing to get a higher
|
|
throughput.
|
|
<p>
|
|
Another use for crontab is making
|
|
automatic backups of the companies
|
|
database, which runs on Access.
|
|
Everyday at noon and at 6PM a copy of
|
|
the whole database is made to the
|
|
server using a script based on smbtar,
|
|
part of the Samba suite, and at 8PM a
|
|
copy of the database is made to tape.
|
|
The home directories, which users use
|
|
at their Windows95 clients mainly to
|
|
store business proposals, are also
|
|
saved to tape every week. Most users
|
|
don't even know there is a Linux
|
|
machine in the network.
|
|
|
|
<H4>Bottom Line -- Savings</H4>
|
|
|
|
<p>Savings with Linux start with the O.S.
|
|
itself, grow through setup with lower
|
|
power equipment (All the above work
|
|
smoothly on a Pentium 133), and by
|
|
making networking hardware
|
|
dispensable (router), goes through easy
|
|
software setup, flexible settings and
|
|
easy administration and training, and
|
|
adds up every month, with low
|
|
equipment maintenance costs, agile
|
|
software updates, and inexpensive
|
|
support. It also protects your
|
|
investment by allowing you to easily
|
|
upgrade to other platforms. Or even
|
|
other OSs, if you for some strange
|
|
reason would ever want to do that.
|
|
<p>
|
|
How much you will actually save
|
|
depends on many factors, but there are
|
|
just so many ways to save with Linux,
|
|
from support fees to documentation to
|
|
feasible redundancy which means less
|
|
down time to flexibility that one thing is
|
|
for certain: It will be a bundle. At PCC,
|
|
Linux saved more than US$3000 in
|
|
initial setup costs and another US$1000
|
|
every month, out of software,
|
|
communications and maintenance
|
|
costs. It also has increased the safety
|
|
of the data on the network, provided
|
|
the employees with the convenience of
|
|
private disk space and access to the
|
|
wealth of information offered by the
|
|
internet and made internal
|
|
communications more agile and
|
|
inexpensive. If you though your
|
|
company or office was too small to
|
|
afford a high quality intranet or a
|
|
company-wide internet connection, think
|
|
again. With Linux, Now You Can!!!
|
|
|
|
<!--===================================================================-->
|
|
<P> <hr> <P>
|
|
<center><H5>Copyright © 1998, Leonardo Lopes <BR>
|
|
Published in Issue 25 of <i>Linux Gazette</i>, February 1998</H5></center>
|
|
|
|
<!--===================================================================-->
|
|
<P> <hr> <P>
|
|
<A HREF="./index.html"><IMG ALIGN=BOTTOM SRC="../gx/indexnew.gif"
|
|
ALT="[ TABLE OF CONTENTS ]"></A>
|
|
<A HREF="../index.html"><IMG ALIGN=BOTTOM SRC="../gx/homenew.gif"
|
|
ALT="[ FRONT PAGE ]"></A>
|
|
<A HREF="./linder.html"><IMG SRC="../gx/back2.gif"
|
|
ALT=" Back "></A>
|
|
<A HREF="./ayers.html"><IMG SRC="../gx/fwd.gif" ALT=" Next "></A>
|
|
<P> <hr> <P>
|
|
<!--startcut ==========================================================-->
|
|
</BODY>
|
|
</HTML>
|
|
<!--endcut ============================================================-->
|