A workstation must also be secure. The Symantec antivirus software runs on the Windows operating and the licensing cost per workstation is $39.99. The enterprise edition of the Symantec antivirus software also has Antispyware built in. Microsoft also provides a security patch system named Windows Update that keeps the Microsoft Windows environment patched with all of the latest security patches which is free. Red Hat Enterprise Linux does provide an area to report vulnerabilities and get updates. Linux is an open source operating in which there are open source user groups that will work on fixes and patches. There is some third party antivirus software available for the Linux environment. An administrator of Linux do not log into the system with the root account which also helps with not getting attacked with elevated privileges. Unlike Windows administrators which most of the time log in with administrator privileges.
Many times one have asked the same things: if Windows is as bad as people says, and if Linux is as good as its users sustain; if Open Office is equivalent or better than Microsoft Office, and so forth. They are questions that one would be able to enunciate and obtain different answers, which might be certain or not. To mitigate these possibilities, one need to examine many metrics in order to evaluate properly the figures involved in comparing one operating system over another in terms of security. Koetzle (2004) released no behalf of Forrester Research, Inc. a document titled "Market Overview Is Linux More Secure Then Windows?" This is a very interesting document that was released on March 19, 2004. Its primary focus is to ensure that the readers fully understand the Vulnerability Life Cycle in order to introduce what matters most when we one discusses security. Considerations such as responsiveness, relative severity, and thoroughness are clearly explained to then identify and set up the basis for the metrics that were used to get the final conclusion. What mostly came out of the report was that Linux had just as much if not more vulnerabilities as Microsoft. Microsoft also handled and resolved vulnerabilities within 25 days where Red Hat took about 57 days.
Microsoft Windows Operating Systems are more accessible than the UNIX/Linux Operating Systems to the general public, because Microsoft has created a monopoly in favor of its products in the global PC market. Most of today's users grew up on Windows so they are familiar with it. Industry seems to be pleased in using Windows for their low end systems, but for high-end more critical systems the marketplace seem to be leaning towards Linux systems. The Linux system is more reliable and less prone to breakdowns and crashes. Linux possesses much greater processing power than Windows.
Microsoft has over 90% of the desktop market. (http://www.e-janco.com/PressRelease/press_release20070907Browser.htm, 2007) Linux has not quite made it to the desktop market mainly because it is not as easy to use as Windows XP or Vista. Installing applications on Windows XP or Vista is easy and consistent as opposed to installing applications on Linux. Depending on which distribution of Linux is being used the install process varies. (http://www.michaelhorowitz.com/Linux.vs.Windows.html, 2007) There are also more third party applications for the Windows XP and Vista operating systems then there is for Linux.
Today over 50 percent of web servers are running Apache. The Apache server is primarily ran on the Linux operating system. (http://news.netcraft.com/, 2007) Because the Linux operating has a low cost (free) and the Apache is free many ISPs and other companies preferred the Linux operating system over Microsoft’s server. The Windows IIS server is not free. Linux is also more stable than Windows and requires less reboots. Windows server crashes and freezes up unlike Linux.
The total cost of ownership for each of these operating is important to look over. Today the cost for Linux support and maintenance is slowly on a rise, the operating system cost is starting to look a great deal like Microsoft’s cost. Microsoft has improved its response to vulnerabilities and patch solution which has lessened the time to patch a Windows server. (http://www.iaps.com/Linux-Windows-TCO-Survey-2005.04.html, 2005) Having Linux on a workstation is still not cost efficient mainly because of compatibility concerns and the need to have in-house programmers. Having in-house programmers will increase cost of ownership. Below is a chart that outlines the TCO:
Looking at Linux as an internet server is cost efficient. Apache runs on the Linux server and it is free. Apache has been around for a long time therefore, there is a lot of support available. Apache handles caching, Perl scripts, and performance is great. One must purchase Windows server 2003 in order to get IIS 6.0. The main concern with Apache is having development staff aboard. One will need developers or highly skilled administrators to write tools and scripts that will monitor the system. Whereas with IIS 6.0 it comes with a slew of monitoring tools and there are third party vendors that have monitoring available. But one must look at Apache is free and so is Linux. They both provide a stable internet server.
Virtual Organizations
Huffman trucking is a virtual organization that has a database system that is used for tracking and logging truck maintenance, driver information, driving logs and violations. Using the MySQL database on Linux would be a preferred a system mainly because of the stability of the Linux operating system. Huffman trucking company needs a system that is secure and reliable. The Linux operating system offers reliability and security. MySQL database is also reliable. Both the Linux operating system and MySQL database are open source code and are free.
The Kudler foods virtual organization uses 5 POS terminals connecting to a POS server. These systems presently use Novell operating system. The company wants to phase out the outdated Novell systems. Changing the POS terminals and server over to a Linux system is possible and feasible. Using a Linux system makes sense in this matter because one can customize the system and have it running on very little resources. Having more memory available for the application and not the operating system makes it a more efficient system. A POS terminal running on Linux is also cost efficient because of the open source nature.
Kelsey’s Middle and High schools (virtual organization) need to have desktop systems setup in their lab for students to use. The preferred system will be Windows desktops over Linux desktops. The reason why the Windows operating system was chosen is because of third party application support. There will be several applications that the students will need in order to complete some of the assignments. These applications are not supported in the Linux environment. Another reason why the Windows operating system was chosen was because the school uses Microsoft’s Exchange email server and there isn’t an email client for Linux that plugs into the Microsoft’s Exchange email system for clients to retrieve email.
Smith Systems Consulting virtual organization has a web site that uses FrontPage extensions. FrontPage is a website editor made by Microsoft. There are certain publishing and development features in the software that can only be utilized if the server sites’ are designed for and has FrontPage extensions available. (www.thehostingnews.com/xs-unix-dedicated-servers.html, 2006) Even though there is support for Linux, FronPage and its extensions were originally designed for Windows server. There maybe certain compatibility issues with Linux servers and the FrontPage extensions. The final verdict is that it is preferable to use a Windows server for Smith Systems Consulting Company.
In conclusion we certainly cannot deny the importance of Linux as an option for servers. Large Corporations such as IBM have allocated important resources on this operating system to gain ground in the sand of IT. Nevertheless, in light of studies, many myths that circulate about Linux are simply that, myths. In fact, they demonstrated that Windows is a mature and stable option for high-performance servers, and its total cost is comparable with Linux' costs. It is without including the intrinsic facility of utilizing Windows. Many independent studies such as Forrester market overview have clearly demonstrated that implementation of open source such as Linspire, Ubuntu, Red Hat, Mandriva, SuSE, Knoppix, Lycoris and Slackware might carry additional costs for training, outsourcing, or costs for supporting the operating system when the environment lacks of trained people to administer and to operate them
References
(August 15, 2007). System requirements for Microsoft Windows operating systems. Retrieved September 12, 2007, Web site: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/304297
(2007). Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5 Desktop details. Retrieved September 12, 2007, Web site: http://www.redhat.com/rhel/desktop/details/
Koetzle, Laura (March 19, 2004). Is Linux More Secure Than. Retrieved September 12, 2007, Web site: http://images.cxotoday.com/cxoimages/pdf/linux_windows_security.pdf
(September 7, 2007). Microsoft's Browser Market Share Erodes Over 9.5%. Retrieved September 12, 2007, Web site: http://www.e-janco.com/PressRelease/press_release20070907Browser.htm
Horowitz, Michael (April, 2007). LINUX vs. WINDOWS. Retrieved September 12, 2007, Web site: http://www.michaelhorowitz.com/Linux.vs.Windows.html
(September, 2007). September 2007 Web Server Survey. Retrieved September 12, 2007, Web site: http://news.netcraft.com/archives/2007/09/03/september_2007_web_server_survey.html
DiDio, Laura (April 04, 2005). Linux vs. Windows: Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) Survey. Retrieved September 12, 2007, Web site: http://www.iaps.com/Linux-Windows-TCO-Survey-2005.04.html
(2006). What is Unix Dedicated Hosting?. Retrieved September 12, 2007, Web site: www.thehostingnews.com/xs-unix-dedicated-servers.html