If the shoe fits...

Novell or NT? This is the question being asked by system administrators, consultants, and computer savvy-lawyers who want the latest and greatest thing running in their office. Who can blame them? Microsoft has been blitzing the market with advertisements about how NT is the greatest thing since sliced bread. And it seems that if you want to run anything from solitaire and simple word processing to enterprise-wide networking management, NT will handle the job.

At first glance, that might be great. Unfortunately, the fact that something can handle the job doesn't mean that it is the best thing for the job.

Use the best tool for the job...

A year or so ago, I engaged in a protracted debate with a consultant/system analyst about the best way to put a friends office onto the Internet. Very quickly, the argument was reduced to NT vs. Linux, a publicly supported version of Unix which is freely available over the Internet. This free operating system is capable enough that some Internet service providers have selected Linux as the operating system to support all of their systems. To me, this seemed to be a natural choice for putting a small office onto the Internet or providing intranet services.

To put the office onto the Internet, the computer system had several requirements. It had to be able to route traffic from the Internet to the other computers on the office network. It also had to host Internet mail and web services, as well as virtual domains (the office wanted to support several different domain names). Finally, the system had to allow dial-in access to both the office network and the Internet.

Linux has some advantages over NT, especially when it comes to Internet/intranet related tasks. The most notable difference between the operating systems is that Linux can handle the same tasks with significantly lower hardware requirements.

The consultant was convinced that the graphical user interface on NT Server was far superior to Linux, which gives users a choice of a character-based interface or an X-Windows graphical interface. I strongly suggested that the graphical interface wasn't a necessity for the tasks required, and that Linux would not require nearly as much RAM as NT. In any event, our protracted debate ended with a challenge: we would each build a system, and see which was better for the task at hand.

NT was installed on a new system with 32 megabytes of RAM. After the consultant figured out which mail and web servers to install, the system was up and running. Unfortunately, the system seemed unable to consistently route traffic to the Internet. It also had difficulty during periods of heavy processor and memory load. For instance, the system would stop routing packets to the Internet while it was performing a backup, or when more than a few users were sending e-mail. After some debate, a decision was made to double the system RAM to 64 megabytes. Even with the extra memory, the system wasn't running well.

A Linux system was built from spare parts, which meant a slower processor and only 12 megabytes of RAM. This wasn't even enough memory to run NT, but turned out to be more than enough for running Linux with a mail server, web server, mailing list software, a dial-in modem, and 16 virtual hosts (which is more than NT was capable of supporting). Admittedly, the Linux system­­being Unix which is foreign to many these days--was not as easy to configure as NT's point-and-click interface, and required some reading and assistance from others using the system. Although it took a little longer to completely configure the system, it ran well from the minute it was put on-line, and was a much more stable platform.

It took a week with the two systems running side by side before the consultant conceded that NT wasn't the best tool for the job. In the end, Linux handled all of the requisite tasks at a much lower cost. The biggest reason the consultant finally agreed with me related to the routing. While both operating systems can handle the routing of TCP/IP packets, NT required much more memory and processor power to handle this task. Rather than constantly add memory to the NT Server system, the consultant agreed that it would be more efficient and economical to use the right tool for the job.

Clearly, Linux isn't for everyone. It is different enough from Windows 95/NT that you'll have to do some learning to work with the system. Still, it is a very efficient operating system, and if you're trying to install a web server or Internet connection in a small office and have an old computers lying around, this might be just the thing. If you want more information about Linux, check out one of the may Linux books available in your local book store, or point your web browser to the Linux Documentation Project, <http://sunsite.unc.edu/mdw/linux.html>, or Linux.org, <http://www.linux.org>.

Got A Story? Share It!

If you hear information about firms moving towards technology, or a new way to become more productive through the use of technology (old or new), or any other war stories, please let me know. Send your story to <Edge@CompLaw.com>. Who knows, the story might be reproduced here.

Samuel Lewis is an attorney practicing Computer/Internet Law and Intellectual Property Law with the firm of Romanik, Lavin, Huss & Paoli in Hollywood, Florida, a member of the Florida Bar's Computer Law Committee, and the creator of COMPLAW^SM . He can be reached at 954-922-4656 or via e-mail: <slewis@CompLaw.com>. The URL for the COMPLAW^SM web site is http://www.CompLaw.com.

Copyright © 1996, Samuel Lewis. All Rights Reserved.

Back to Article Index