• Vote in November Mapping Competition to select a winner!
  • There is NO official Otland's Discord server and NO official Otland's server list. The Otland's Staff does not manage any Discord server or server list. Moderators or administrator of any Discord server or server lists have NO connection to the Otland's Staff. Do not get scammed!

Windows vs Linux Hosting

Aoxomoxoa

Dev
Joined
Jun 23, 2020
Messages
95
Solutions
1
Reaction score
49
Location
USA
GitHub
TheAoxomoxoa
What are the advantages besides the fact that Linux/GNU is a superior operating system for hosting?

I've been running a development server on Windows and am wondering if it would be better to host on Linux. I've compiled the sever on both and it feels relatively the same.
 

Lurk

Active Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2017
Messages
339
Reaction score
44
man for tibia there's not much difference honestly, some people with not much knowledge (not like I'm a god or something) simply say that linux is better and "that's it" because that's what they heard, linux has a lot of advantages on top of being free, but you're only hosting a tibia server, keep your stuff up to date and you will be fine (if windows was so bad as some people say microsft wouldn't exist anymore, right? and they're even one of the most rich companies out there come on..). be aware that the os windows requires more resources, tho a machine with 8gb ram should be enough for some 100 or so players EVEN ON newest rl map server that are huge

go with you're more comfortable with as long as you can pay for the windows license
 

Tony32

Veteran OT User
Joined
Jun 6, 2008
Messages
1,214
Reaction score
290
Windows uses more resources (ram, hddspace, cpu)
Linux (if server minimal install) uses nothing basically. Never needs restarts. Extremely stable. Free. Ease of use (services, scripts, cronjobs etc etc)
also, linux is always good to know, at least the basics, so I'd say go for linux. For starters you could install a DE. Like gnome, kde, cinammon to ease the learning curve :)
Even if Windows can do the job, at least give linux a fair chance (imo)
just my 2 cents.

Edit: forgot to mention, hosting on windows is often waaaaaaaaaaay more expensive if using a hosting service. That can be a big dealbreaker for many.
 
OP
Aoxomoxoa

Aoxomoxoa

Dev
Joined
Jun 23, 2020
Messages
95
Solutions
1
Reaction score
49
Location
USA
GitHub
TheAoxomoxoa
Windows uses more resources (ram, hddspace, cpu)
Linux (if server minimal install) uses nothing basically. Never needs restarts. Extremely stable. Free. Ease of use (services, scripts, cronjobs etc etc)
also, linux is always good to know, at least the basics, so I'd say go for linux. For starters you could install a DE. Like gnome, kde, cinammon to ease the learning curve :)
Even if Windows can do the job, at least give linux a fair chance (imo)
just my 2 cents.

Edit: forgot to mention, hosting on windows is often waaaaaaaaaaay more expensive if using a hosting service. That can be a big dealbreaker for many.
I know the ins and outs of most distros. Have used them for years. I'm currently hosting it on a CLI Linux server from Ubuntu. I don't really see any difference between running it on my CLI or just on my Windows machine. I feel the memory usage is too small for that to matter. At least for developing a small server.

My question is though, are there any issues with tfs within the windows builds vs the Linux builds? Or are they relatively the same and both stable?
 

Merrok

Magic Tomato
Joined
Jun 18, 2009
Messages
162
Solutions
6
Reaction score
177
(if windows was so bad as some people say microsft wouldn't exist anymore, right? and they're even one of the most rich companies out there come on..)
Well that's a very narrow perspective. Microsoft hasn't had their main revenue coming from operating systems for over a decade now. For a long time this was Microsoft office and now it is their cloud hosting service.
Besides that, windows as an end user OS is still the most common OS. And there are good reasons for it.
Windows itself is, objectively, the superior operating system. It is by far more secure, it is very stable and for example working with more complicated systems like LDAP or Kerberos is way easier on windows.
On top of that, why many companies use windows servers is because windows actually has certain certifications required by many companies to outsource work to you, while no Linux distro has. And it is way less of a hassle to set up. You simply set it up, and it works.
And yes, even with windows you don't need to restart. Ever. Provided you know what you are doing of course.
But of course there are downsides. It is more expensive, it does take more resources, it has less of an community, there is less open-source software.
But while many think that with Linux you are more free to do anything you want using the console, since PowerShell this isn't true anymore.
Powershell is way more powerful than bash. But it is also way less spread.

In the end, it always depends on mainly what you want to use your system for and secondly if there is no difference, it is personal preference.
Personally, I like working with Linux, in my case debian on servers, the best. But I also simply know my way around a Linux distro way better than about windows.
But if you decide to use Linux, don't do what all these idiots recommend using wine. Then just go with windows. Wine can be very efficient, but it has to be configured differently and perfectly for every service. It is not as simple as starting it and expecting it to work flawlessly.
In the case of TFS, I don't think one or the other is really better. But you will probably find more support for Linux and after all, it is cheaper and so easy to do.

And remember what Lurk said: Always keep your system up to date ;)


Oh and offtopic: Microsoft as well as some companies developing for Linux distros work on supporting the other more.
Actually Microsoft has been one of the biggest donators for Linux for years. At some point they even thought about buying Ubuntu (not sure how that would have worked but well).
Now Microsoft is planning on implementing a linux kernel in their next major version. If this works as flawless as working on a linux system, there is actually a lot less of a reason to have a linux distro on your client.

At the same time ubuntu is working on supporting windows application and a better cooperation. So it's an interesting development to watch and see how this turns out.
 

mdwilliams

(Michael)
Premium User
Joined
Nov 15, 2007
Messages
695
Solutions
4
Reaction score
179
Location
Santiago, Chile (Australian)
Relatively the same and both stable as far as I am aware.
I haven't hosted production from a machine at home in about 10 years though.

I choose to host on Linux for a few reasons:
1.) No server licence fee
2.) Lighter than windows server so I pay for less resources
3.) I'm personally more familiar with automating backups etc. in linux (pretty sure this is very easy in windows server too, i've just never needed to try)
4.) Don't need a heavy development environment to be able to compile
5.) I'm personally more familiar with establishing acceptable levels of security in linux (windows server may be more secure out of the box, unsure)
 

Night Wolf

I don't bite.
Joined
Feb 10, 2008
Messages
370
Solutions
3
Reaction score
509
Linux compilation tends to be stabler. Windows tends to break things upon updates and it alsos shutdows and updates automatically after a long time so for servers I wouldn't go with Windows unless you use the Windows Server and configure it correctly.

Also virus, randomwares and overall security of windows are downsides. Linux has inbuilt functions and easy to install libs to manage your application in a better way than windows does.

You can use one click install packages or docker images to set tfs environment very quickly. There's honestly no argument towards windows preference besides the personal preference.
 

Merrok

Magic Tomato
Joined
Jun 18, 2009
Messages
162
Solutions
6
Reaction score
177
Also virus, randomwares and overall security of windows are downsides.
This is completely wrong. There is only a small truth in this which you probably did not refer to.
Windows being insecure is a misconception that has been around for a long time. It had an incident decades ago with a huge security flaw and ever since they have improved their security and kept it up to date. Most big virus spreads in infrastructures are not because of windows. In most cases those viruses abuse issues that have been fixed months or even years earlier, but the company did simply not update their system.
The ONLY upside when it comes to viruses in Linux is, that there simply are far less.
People laugh about someone using windows defender. But it is actually a very good defense system.
Don't understand me wrong, I do like Linux on servers better and am not a friend of windows servers. But I am trying to be objective here.
 

Lurk

Active Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2017
Messages
339
Reaction score
44
(assuming it's windows) go to your vps -> search for updates -> after updating disable windows update and that's it (look for updates regurlarly tho, just ensure it won't restart when you don't want it to)
don't use your vps the same way you use your pc and you won't ever get any virus and yeah windows is secure, at least as secure as any os can be
if windows wasn't secure specially for companies microsft would be sued for days and days, that's what I mean they're still rich

if windows indeed sucked as much ass as people say microsoft wouldn't have a singly dime anymore. still it's personnal preference but keep in mind windows demands more resources and has a fee
 

Night Wolf

I don't bite.
Joined
Feb 10, 2008
Messages
370
Solutions
3
Reaction score
509
I wish this was just my personal opinion but actually windows is far less secure and stable than many linux distros.
This is also because Microsoft has 77% of OS users and Linux has only 2%, and it's also because Linux users have usually a higher understanding on the OS so they are not as easy targets. This makes people not wanting to develop malicious software to Linux.

Other thing is that windows by default treats the first user as admin, while for linux you require to sudo and chmod to actually run a 'exe' malicious.
The builds aren't all perfect, but being open source you have a whole set of people constantly checking it for backdoors. Some of linux builds were actually built having security in mind, if I'm not mistaken even Snowden endorsed use of one of those distributions.

Don't need to trust my word for it, use google or ask an expert.

f windows indeed sucked as much ass as people say microsoft wouldn't have a singly dime anymore. still it's personnal preference but keep in mind windows demands more resources and has a fee
Do not mix success with security, there are several restaurants over the world who aren't higienic but still make a lot of success (and money) out of it.
Windows make success because it runs everything in background (updates and so on) without asking the user and facilitate a lot of stuff for user treating him as admin. This is how many people expect to be, but this overall control is also the reason why it's so easy for people to actually fake register info of a downloaded software and make people run it to give access to the system.
 

Lurk

Active Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2017
Messages
339
Reaction score
44
I get your point and I might be in the wrong here since I don't know as much as you do, but for a tibia server specially I dunno if there would be that much difference, specially if you use it wiselly (don't download anything fishy, don't run anything that you don't need)
I would choose linux everyday over windows to host something really big and serious, and it's not like my server don't matter to me as much, but windows is just fine. Also, while I'm at it I'll ask a question: Since linux is case sensitive and windows is not, if I were to migrate rn to linux I would face some problems, right?
 
Last edited:

Night Wolf

I don't bite.
Joined
Feb 10, 2008
Messages
370
Solutions
3
Reaction score
509
I get your point and I might be in the wrong here since I don't know as much as you do, but for a tibia servers specially I dunno if there would be that much difference, specially if you use it wiselly (don't download anything fishy, don't run anything that you don't need)
I would choose linux everyday over windows to host something really big and serious, and it's not like my server don't matter to me as much, but windows is just fine. Also, while I'm at it I'll ask a question: Since linux is case sensitive and windows is not, if I were to migrate rn to linux I would face some problems, right?
well, it really depends on how much you care about the server you're developing. If you don't care at all then it makes no difference if you're running it even on local machine.
It's also about resources (consumption of the OS and also $$ since windows has licenses and make vps to have little higher prices)

I wouldn't be able to confirm you that all linux are case sensitive and how exactly this could impact you. To be honest I'm not a very experienced linux myself, my comments were based upon studies and opinion of experts that I know.
 

Astrax

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 18, 2008
Messages
98
Reaction score
59
I believe that the main danger in endorsing windows hosting here in the OT community is that people with sparse knowledge about the security implications of hosting a server end up installing XAMPP into their main computer with all their data & personal information. Just thinking about it makes me feel uncomfortable, I learned the hard way 10 years ago 😅
 

Merrok

Magic Tomato
Joined
Jun 18, 2009
Messages
162
Solutions
6
Reaction score
177
This is also because Microsoft has 77% of OS users and Linux has only 2%, and it's also because Linux users have usually a higher understanding on the OS so they are not as easy targets. This makes people not wanting to develop malicious software to Linux.
You are, again as many do, looking at the topic on a too narrow space.
I also love that you googled the topic and simply copied the first result you found.
First of all, those numbers aren't for servers, but the numbers in general. So the statistics you use are useless for a servers perspective, but I get your point there. (Actually not your point since you copied it)
Going by the fact that in general a Linux user has a higher understanding of the system, is a bad approach.
This biases the whole result. You need to assume both sys admins have the same knowledge of their system.
But ok, your point is mostly about the number of viruses now. And I have pointed exactly that out. BECAUSE there are more windows users, there are more viruses for windows. This is NOT because of security or the understanding of the user. If you have a higher user number, chances are you will infect someone.
Having more viruses, also means that it's more work for Microsoft to keep track of those and update their system accordingly. But the simple fact that many issues get fixed before there is even a virus for it, speaks for itself.
Reading the article you are quoting from, they are talking about a lot of small differences which are partially wrong in the first place or ignoring a part of the actual process.
And the whole article more or less is only from a users perspective.
The fact that "the first user is root" is actually true for both cases. Installing the minimal version of a Linux distro, the first user will always be root. You need to add other users manually. This is of course standard procedure. This not being standard in windows, has nothing to do with the system though, but with the user being careless.

Less people targeting a system or more careless users does not make or break the security of an operating system.
And those are the exactly the core arguments you find when you look for "experts" saying their opinion.
And apparently that ".exe" files can just be run while Linux requires to make a file executable first?
Actually this is not true. windows only runs .exe files out of the box if they were signed by a trusted developer. If not, you will have to confirm. It will also ask you for admin permissions if those are needed even on the admin account (but technically you can avoid that using a certain PowerShell command)
On Linux you actually do not need to make a file executable first too. This is wrong. You can work around that. Quite easily. And if you are on an admin account, it will execute it as admin. Without asking. Ever.

Less attacks might be an advantage, but what happens if that suddenly shifts? Which happens only when there are more users using Linux. Which again means more careless users. See how this builds on each other?


Edit: By the way, I thought the same thing for a while. Who changed my opinion was actually a now graduated PhD student in IT-Security working for one of the most renowned IT-Sec professors in Europe and is now head of one of the security departments responsible for devices of siemens. Not that this means anything, but you told me to ask an expert :(

Edit2: Oh yeah, Linux also doesn't have certain security dependent certificates out of the box like ISO27001. This is technically possible, but much harder and more expensive to gain with Linux. And here comes knowledge into play: It is common knowledge on how to achieve this on windows, not on Linux however. So much for the knowledge factor. This really depends on the area to be honest.
 
Last edited:

Lurk

Active Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2017
Messages
339
Reaction score
44
Merrok do you think I'd have many problems (case sensitive related) going from windows to ubunto 16?
 

Merrok

Magic Tomato
Joined
Jun 18, 2009
Messages
162
Solutions
6
Reaction score
177
Merrok do you think I'd have many problems (case sensitive related) going from windows to ubunto 16?
Well migrating to a completely different OS is always gonna bring issues. Case sensitivity is going to be the least of your problems.
The best thing you can do is lookup on how to best migrate and then step by step sort out all issues and errors you get.

Also I just noticed we went kinda offtopic and I really argued strongly for windows even though I mainly use Linux myself. Oh well...
 

Znote

<?php echo $title; ?>
Staff member
Global Moderator
Premium User
Joined
Feb 14, 2008
Messages
6,834
Solutions
240
Reaction score
1,616
Location
Norway
GitHub
Znote
Windows is fine to use for development purposes as long as you run the server through WSL. 😂

... Thats actually pretty awesome, and is my prefered dev environment. :D

Windows servers has their corporate purposes (its an effective platform for developers to ineffectively contribute to a corporation and keep a stable job), but for OT servers its a bad joke that was killed over 10 years ago.
 
OP
Aoxomoxoa

Aoxomoxoa

Dev
Joined
Jun 23, 2020
Messages
95
Solutions
1
Reaction score
49
Location
USA
GitHub
TheAoxomoxoa
Windows is fine to use for development purposes as long as you run the server through WSL. 😂

... Thats actually pretty awesome, and is my prefered dev environment. :D

Windows servers has their corporate purposes (its an effective platform for developers to ineffectively contribute to a corporation and keep a stable job), but for OT servers its a bad joke that was killed over 10 years ago.
Have you had issues with your download speed from apt using WSL? I can only download at like max 200kbs on it. On a VM from the same iso, like 10mbs lol

Been using Ubuntu Server 20.4

I am one of those people whose jobs force them to use Windows 10.... Hate it. I used Arch for years and switched back cause of this job and I feel like I'm 90 years old trying to use an iphone
 
Last edited:

Znote

<?php echo $title; ?>
Staff member
Global Moderator
Premium User
Joined
Feb 14, 2008
Messages
6,834
Solutions
240
Reaction score
1,616
Location
Norway
GitHub
Znote
Have you had issues with your download speed from apt using WSL? I can only download at like max 200kbs on it. On a VM from the same iso, like 10mbs lol

Now that I think about it, yes. I remember it taking quite a while to setup. But I imagine this is because of the source mirrors /repositories. I recently set up a LinuxMint server using Virtualbox, and configured it to a national repository mirror and it was much faster than what you get in WSL out of the box.

So I think that has something to do with WSL containers picking preconfigured download servers that arent neccesarily close to your location. (in etc /etc/apt/) sources.list

I rarely have to do big apt jobs (except initialization and the occasional update), so I don't let it bother me. There does not seem to be a network IO driver issue or anything like that, thankfully.
 
OP
Aoxomoxoa

Aoxomoxoa

Dev
Joined
Jun 23, 2020
Messages
95
Solutions
1
Reaction score
49
Location
USA
GitHub
TheAoxomoxoa
Now that I think about it, yes. I remember it taking quite a while to setup. But I imagine this is because of the source mirrors /repositories. I recently set up a LinuxMint server using Virtualbox, and configured it to a national repository mirror and it was much faster than what you get in WSL out of the box.

So I think that has something to do with WSL containers picking preconfigured download servers that arent neccesarily close to your location. (in etc /etc/apt/) sources.list

I rarely have to do big apt jobs (except initialization and the occasional update), so I don't let it bother me.
Yeah I may just use WSL since it's already configured. I also built TFS side by side in WSL vs a Hyper-V container both running 20.4, the Hyper-V container was marginally faster. Built it probably 20-30 seconds faster. It's just annoying to have to boot up a VM in general. I love the concept of WSL and might just bite the bullet. Much easier to build apps on Linux than windows... But it's also much easier to navigate around the OS in windows than a CLI Linux server 😂 I currently just have a samba drive set up where I edit on Windows and transfer to my Linux VM then build it on there, but I might look into speeding up WSL and doing it that way instead.
 
Top