[Magnolium]

Hey there, i just completed a machine made out of spare parts.

It's a Pentium 200mmx with 32mb ram 30gig harddrive.

pretty low end comp but it cost me absolutely nothing.

The fact is this, i wanna use that machine as a webserver. I wanna host websites on it. It will be on all the time, i will have no-ip running it and it will be on a network with my main comp which runs on winxp.

My question is, should I install Windows Server 2003 on it or shoud i install Mandrake Linux 10 ?

Thanx alot

[wizard]

With those system specs, I would definitley go with Linux. I don't think the Win2K3 minimum specs could go that low.

[contrasutra]

Well, I'll get flamed by Steve, but Linux is the more secure server, and most definitely by default.

I wouldn't necessarily pick Mandrake, but to each his own.

Oh, but definitely get more RAM. You're not running any server off of 32MB. The processor is just fine, but fill the RAM up.

Also, I doubt you have more than one license for WinServer 2003, so the only legal choice is linux anyway.

[moved to appropriate forum]

[Menge]

hmmm with THAT much ram? linux.
u'll need at least 128mb of ram to run anything semi-comfortable in Win2003

IF you are upgrading, i'd say Win2003 cause it's (IMO) easier to set up.
THOUGH if you don't have the dough$$$, then go for linux since it's free (and not THAT hard to set up for basic stuff )

[Seph]

Added a [question] tag to your thread.

------------------------------
The Topic Has Been Tagged
// Seph

[Jaggedfel]

Linux. I've got pretty much the exact same machine at home I used as my primary comp until September. Anyways, I had a hard enough time running Windows 95 on that thing. Definetly Linux...

[rjohnstone]

You will need at least 256 MB of memory to load Windows Server 2003.

Minumum CPU speed to install is 133 Mhz except Data Center Edition.
Recommended is PIII 550 Mhz.

Go with Linux and buy some more memory... if you can still find any that slow.

[babypapichulo]

Okay so if I have a low-end PC I could use it as a server.
Does that mean that I don't pay for hosting, nothing just electricity. How does this work? I don't get it.

[rjohnstone]

You can use almost any PC as a server. Emphasis on the word almost.
As for hosting, sure, get yourself a fast connection to your house, a static IP address (not required, but helpful) and away you go.
Just hope your ISP will allow you to do it... most don't without a business account.
As for cost, it's cheaper to pay for hosting elsewhere in most cases.

[Stevie BM]

Quote

Originally posted by contrasutra@May 12 2004, 02:32 AM
Well, I'll get flamed by Steve, but Linux is the more secure server, and most definitely by default.
[...]
Also, I doubt you have more than one license for WinServer 2003, so the only legal choice is linux anyway.

I never flame, Contra <_<

As for Linux being more secure, that all depends on how you define "default" - Linux and Server2k3 are roughly equal - my server 2k3 box, for example, has hardly been touched, in terms of "lockdown", and nothing can find me/get to me. When I open ports on Server2k3's firewall, though (and on my other firewalls, et al.), and don't have any of the other firewalls running stateful inspection on said ports, Server2k3 does become vulnerable... That said, with naught but Server2k3's firewall and no open ports, my machine is just as secure as any Linux box - what they can't find, they can't attack.

As for licensing, Linux is always going to be the best choice - Server2k3's licensing chagnes the moment you put it into a "production" environment (i.e. you have external users).

Not only that, but the machine mentioned would only just run Server2k3, and it'd struggle then...

[MDZ61384]

stevie: what firewall are you using on server2k3? just curious

[Stevie BM]

Quote

Originally posted by MDZ61384@May 19 2004, 11:50 PM
stevie: what firewall are you using on server2k3? just curious

That's Server2k3's default firewall I'm talking about, but I've also got an external hardware firewall that I use.