That was a good post, Jeff. There was no zealotry there :)
In reply to:
I believe that it's safe to say that we believe that Linux quality is far above that of Windows - for our purposes, at least. While you might be able to make a case for it being hogwash,
I could make a case, but that would result in a long and drawn out argument :P
In reply to:
I completely agree, and never said otherwise. I do believe that on the average for servers - particularly when it comes to security issues - open source tends to result in better implementations as "many eyes make all bugs shallow", resulting in speedy fixes. This is an opinion, but an opinion does not make a zealot.
As Bruce Schneier said, simply publishing the code does not automatically mean that people will examine it for security flaws. Security researchers are fickle and busy people. They do not have the time to examine every piece of source code that is published.
The notion that open source automagically means that there are many eyes that will find all the flaws is a myth. It enables you to review the code, but it does not make you review the code.
That said, Linux security has been audited pretty thoroughly, though I'd argue that it's still trailing behind FreeBSD, NetBSD and OpenBSD.
In reply to:
For what it's worth, I also believe that open source tends to be detrimental when it comes to usability, as user interface design rarely benefits from design by committee. I much prefer user interface designs when they are done by a small group of trained professionals with UI/HI design experience.
Different methods, different needs...
No argument there. Although I would posit that interface-by-committee approach doesn't always work either... think Microsoft Bob, or the infamous "My Computer" spectacle...
In reply to:
Well, I was being charitable. I didn't want to offend anyone. :>
Now why on earth wouldn't you want to do that? I tell the dumb-as-a-rock MCSEs exactly how much I think they're worth.
In reply to:
I think the concern is that given Microsoft's track history, we simply don't trust them - and for reasons a lot more recent than 10 years ago.
The thing is that I've had an Internet-facing Win2K box going for four years straight now and no-one has hacked it yet. If I were to believe everything I hear from the Linux community, that box would be a warez and kiddie porn hub by now -- and I'm reasonably sure it isn't.
I personally do not use anti-spyware software on my Windows box. I do have an anti-virus software, but more as a forensic tool and without real-time scanning. I do not need those kinds of tools because my box is otherwise secure. People who rely on anti-virus software on Windows to keep them secure have their entire security setup backwards; the AV should be the last line of defense, not the first. Yet that is what most people consider as "securing" Windows. Ergo, their security fails miserably. Ergo, Windows must suck. As I've said, Windows is an advanced users' platform...
In reply to:
Since we - and you - don't have access to their source code,
Who says I don't? :>
In reply to:
we can't really verify that they are doing their job security-wise.
The few leaked reports of third-party audits suggest that the code is actually pretty well written. If you are a major customer of Microsoft's and security is important to you, they will give you access Windows source code -- so they're not operating in complete secrecy.
In reply to:
Plus, if we take a chance and decide down the road that they aren't doing their part to make our servers secure, we can't exactly switch to another vendor that will take our concerns into consideration (the "lock in" that they benefit from so much).
That's the best argument I've heard for not using Windows so far...
In reply to:
We've been contacted by Microsoft directly on a number of occasions, and have discussed all of this with them. While we never seriously considered switching (we're doing quite well already as a Linux-based host, business-wise), we've listened to what they had to say. Even if Windows were in every way just as good as Linux, there would have to be a substantial increase in benefit to us and our customers for us to even consider the huge undertaking that would be supporting it.
I do think that for Dreamhost Linux is the best choice as a platform. It keeps the costs down, it's faster than the BSD unix variants, reasonably secure, and allows for a healthy degree of agility in business decisions.
In reply to:
I think you must have me - and DreamHost - confused with someone else. I know people like those you speak of, but I think your characterization of us is a bit incorrect.
Fair enough -- perhaps I misread your statement.
In reply to:
Call that zealotry if you like,
.
.
Holding an opinion does not mean that opinion is invalid, or that the holder of that opinion is a zealot.
I think perhaps you must have me confused with someone else. I know people like those you speak of -- those who'd think that holding an opinion is zealotry -- but I think characterizating me as such an individual is a bit incorrect ;)
Opinion does not equal zealotry. Uncritical yammering of a boneheaded opinion you didn't come up with yourself, now that's zealotry. Choosing Linux over Windows is not zealotry, just as much as choosing Chevy over Toyota isn't zealotry. It's zealotry if you wave the American flag, go ra-ra over your American-made Chevy which must be better than some Japanese-made abomination, because you were told so, because it's American, so it must be better, and anyone telling you otherwise be damned -- and preferably shot, too.
I am not saying that you are like that, Jeff. All I am saying that some of the things you said sounded like the classic Linux-users' unreasoning hatred of Windows. If you have an informed opinion on the subject, you aren't a zealot. If you do not have an informed opinion but are lambasting Windows anyway just for the heck of it, only then would you be a zealot.
In reply to:
Linux is good for some things, rather awful (in my opinion) for others.
Yeah, I'd use Linux (or MacOS X) for desktop and FreeBSD for servers :P