Analysis that Compares and Contrasts UNIX/Linux and MS Windows - Essay Example

Analysis that Compares and Contrasts UNIX/Linux and MS Windows Introduction If a computer can be considered to be as a body then the operating system is nothing less than the life and soul of the body that gives it meaning, purpose and allows it to interact with the various parts that make up the computer. In the modern computer environment, the operating systems run by the majority of the world’s personal computers have become divided on the lines of MS Windows and UNIX/Linux both of which have their plusses and minuses. As described by Beckman and Hirsch (2001), Windows XP dominates the landscape of personal computers but other operating systems such as Mac OS X and UNIX/Linux are certainly making inroads into the Microsoft dominated operating system world. Distribution packages as diverse as Max OS X (which is based on Linux but relatively closed) to Ubuntu which is fully supported by the open source community are challenging the dominance of windows. Therefore, for any decision maker in an IT center and even for business professionals, understanding their differences, similarities and advantages of one over the other is an important concern. It is not only a technical or project level decision which has to be made by professionals but can also be considered a business decision. The Comparison In business terms, perhaps the most important concern is cost since that has a direct impact on the bottom line of an organization. However, it is difficult to sum up the cost of going with Windows or Linux simply as a numerical figure since the decision to choose one over the other may not be remain solely to the cost of acquiring the license. Maintenance costs, support costs, security costs and even the cost of upgrades and compatibility can figure into the equation. Further, variations of windows, i.e. 2000, XP or Vista and the numerous UNIX/Linux distribution packages, Ubuntu, Linpus, OS X etc. make it more logical to call them operating environments rather than operating systems (Sanders, 2006). Hardware Requirements and Market Share The hardware requirements for both Windows and Linux appear to be more or less the same. A midlevel personal computer available on the market today could run Windows XP as efficiently as it could run Ubuntu or Linpus (Sanders, 2006). However, with certain versions of Windows Vista, the hardware requirements can be quite heavy if the full user interface experience is demanded by the users. In fact, these steep hardware requirements have meant that some companies have completely ignored Vista as an option and continue to work with Windows XP since they may consider it to be a more stable and mature operating system. This is perhaps also the reason why Windows XP continues to be the dominant operating system of the world while Linux and its distribution packages are only used by a minority (LaGesse, 2007). Dollars and Cents When it comes to comparing the actual price of the two operating environments, UNIX/Linux can essentially be had for free if a company goes for installing Ubuntu on its computers. Networking, file sharing, internet connectivity, email software, browser agents and even office productivity packages come with the distribution therefore Linux can offer the total solution for a common home/small office for free. The Windows environment however, may require separate and often expensive packages for all these functions. Many of these packages might even have to be purchased from Microsoft itself. In essence, the cost figure on the Linux side can be reduced to zero while on the Windows side the final bill may run into hundreds of dollars per system. Maintenance and Management Costs When it comes to maintaining and managing computer, Windows seems to be a better option than Linux since windows is popularly thought to be easier to use than UNIX. As of yet, computer scientists have not discovered the right formula to balance the concerns of system security, administration and upgrades with ease of use. Schweitzer (2006, Pg. 32) says that, “No operating system today is completely safe from the onslaught of hackers”. It is further reported that: “Hackers are injecting malware not only in the operating systems of Windows but also that of Mac and Linux. For instance, "Virus.Linux.Bia.a/Virus.Win32.Bia," appeared in April 2006. Mac is now a tempting target for hackers given that it is now using Intel chips (Schweitzer, 2006, Pg. 32).” Security Innovation Inc. analyzed administration and maintenance costs in terms of continually changing business requirements and concluded that Windows was better than Linux. The study tested Microsoft Windows 2000 Server against SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 8 by putting them both through a year of updates and patches released from their source. These updates were added to the machines in an experiment where business requirements were also changed quite often to simulate the real world environment (Galli, 2005). Additionally, the systems were both upgraded a year later where the Windows server was upgraded to Windows Server 2003 while the Linux server was given SUSE Linux Enterprise Server version 9. The project used the expertise of Windows administration gurus as well as three Linux administrators to make sure that the business requirements and the installations of patches were handled correctly. It was discovered that on the Linux server patches created conflicts if new modules or additional software was added to handle changing business requirements (Galli, 2005). At the end of the year, the Linux Administrators were left with a complex matrix and that made it quite difficult to maintain the server. The windows solution remained quite simple in terms of applying patches and changing software when the requirements changed which gave greater security and stability along with compatibility to windows. Interestingly enough, this project was supported and funded by Microsoft. Taking the study as it is, it shows that over a period the mangement as well as the administration of Windows based systems may be considerably easier to manage than the administration and management of Linux servers (Galli, 2005). Security Costs Windows is not secure. This notion comes from experts such as Dahl (2005) who writes for PC Magazine and tool a look at the various options that PC users have to get away from the windows monopoly. Various distributions of Linux and even getting a Mac could be an option for users concerned about security costs. While discussing the problems with windows he writes that: These days, youd be crazy to run a Windows box without every hotfix installed, as well as antivirus software, a firewall, and a spyware scanner. Linux and Mac users rarely need to worry about most of those tools. The vast majority of viruses, spyware, and adware all focus on Windows (Dahl, 2005, Pg. 77). Of course, even open source software has security issues but it seems that the Linux environment is considerably more secure than Windows. Further, problems with open source software are often patched within hours while Windows hotfixes can take days or weeks (Dahl, 2005). This is because windows was designed from the very beginning to work as a standalone machine with networking added only as an afterthought. Linux on the other hand, was designed to be used in a networking environment therefore; security has always been a concern for the developers working on it. Vaughan-Nichols (2005) took a detailed look at security within the competing operating environments and conducted a detailed experiment with several Linux and Windows servers located throughout the world. These machines were supposed to detect intrusion attempts but not do anything proactive to stop the attempts. In essence, they were honey pots designed to see the amount of security that could be obtained from installations of Linux and Windows. The systems were installed using default settings and only the default security measures were activated on the servers to mimic real world small business and home based installations. It was also made sure that no machine was made more attractive for a hacker than the other and most importantly, there were no patches installed or updates permitted on the systems. When the results of this honey pot experiment came in all of the machines, which were running windows, had been compromised within a few hours (Vaughan-Nichols, 2005). On the other hand, only a small minority of the Linux systems were hacked of which half were broken into with brute force password hacking that is not a vulnerability of the system itself (Vaughan-Nichols, 2005). In such a situation, it is clear that the business which sees security as being very important may have to use Linux on its servers simply since that would be a necessity. Of course, the same business may choose to go with a more secure operating system from windows, i.e. Windows Vista, but that too comes with its own set of problems as well as extensive hardware requirements depending on the version of Vista being used (LaGesse, 2007). Programming Capabilities and Application Software A part of the high requirements for Vista comes from the .NET architecture on which modern versions of Windows are based. While the .NET environment makes programming easier, the applications that are presented by Microsoft to aid in developing in the .NET environment have steep requirements. For example, Visual Studio 2008 is much heavier than many other available packages for Linux which allow program development in Java. However, despite their differences, both platforms and development environments offer their advantages to programmers and it is the decision of the individual programmer to go with one or the other (Paul and Evans, 2004). At the same time, the requirements of the project and the business environment can also influence which development environment is selected since Linux with Java is a better option if security configurability and user authentication concerns are quite high. On the other hand, if cryptography and code protection are important then the .NET environment within windows becomes a better choice. Neither is actually bad for programmers overall but individual choice and the needs of the project have to be considered when programming projects are concerned (Piliptchouk, 2004). In fact, the needs of the company and the needs of the project can also be extended to the idea of application software. While Windows and Linux are coming to a point of parity with regard to office productivity and other basic software tools, many programs are still produced exclusively for Windows. Even though Linux can emulate some Windows programs, the available software list for windows far exceeds that available on Linux. Even in terms of computer games packages, Windows wins hands down where software availability and compatibility is concerned (Dahl, 2005). User Interface The Windows user interface is based on the WIMP architecture. Even though the notion is debated, Apple computers is often credited with creating the first mass market computer operating system with a GUI (Graphical User Interface) that was useable and practical (Hertzfeld, 2004). Modern computer interfaces that run on Windows borrow a lot from the same interface and undoubtedly, Windows itself has to be given a lot of credit for bringing the GUI to the masses. While Windows and the GUI in general have seen a lot development in the past two decades and more, many of the basics have remained the same. However, with the coming of Vista, user interfaces have taken on a life of their own as Vista pushes the boundaries between an interface and an interactive computer. Perhaps taking cues again from Mac OS X, Windows has become more colorful, with several translucent and semitransparent elements. The graphically enhanced version of Vista has high levels of detail and in some ways, adds to the usability of the system but also increases the memory and graphics capabilities demand of the computer (LaGesse, 2007). The Linux environment has also come a long way from a text based command line interface to an environment which uses the WIMP architecture and also surpasses Windows in certain aspects of usability in terms of ease of use. Distribution packages like Linpus and Ubuntu for example, are designed to be useable by people who have had little previous experience with computers. These individual may not need all the applications that are available for Windows. Further, those who work with cloud computing may only need to access the internet and that could be done as easily and securely on Windows as Ubuntu, Gentoo or Linpus (Dahl, 2005). With a personal opinion, this also creates the idea of an operating system being unnecessary where a computer can simply get on the internet and use the internet to create documents, check email, view pictures, listen to music, or even see a streaming movie. In fact, powerful mobile phones of the future running OS X or running on the Android platform may eliminate the need for an operating system altogether. However, that is a very uncertain future and it is difficult to say if it could even be a reality. Conclusion The only thing that becomes clear from the comparison is that both Windows and the various distributions of Linux are pushing each other towards parity in terms of features and abilities. While Linux is become prettier with more options in terms of who can use it, Windows is becoming more concerned with security and with letting more people use the system. Undoubtedly, competition is good for the computer industry as it is good for the operating systems market where options allow people to make better choices based on their individual needs and their personal requirements. Word Count: 2,388 Works Cited Beckman, D. and Hirsch, D. 2001, ‘Mac Is Back in Town’, ABA Journal, vol. 87, no. 8, pp. 70-72. Dahl, E. 2005, ‘The Truth About Windows Alternatives’, PC World, vol. 23, no. 9, pp. 75-82. Galli, P. 2005, ‘Study pits Windows vs. Linux’, eWeek, vol. 22, no. 47, pp. 22-23. Hertzfeld, A. Revolution in the Valley. OReilly Media, 2004. LaGesse, D. 2007, ‘Tech to Ride an Upgrade Cycle’, US News and World Report, vol. 142, no. 2, p. 9-10. Paul, N. and Evans, D. 2004, ‘.NET Security: Lessons Learned and Missed from Java’, University of Virginia, [Online] Available at: http://www.cs.virginia.edu/papers/acsac-net-java.pdf Piliptchouk, D. 2004, Java vs. .NET Security, O’Riley. Sanders, T. 2006, ‘Low-Cost Laptop Project Boosts Desktop Linux’, Ecommerce Times website, [Online] Available at: http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/W01IUarvckwmQl/Low-Cost-Laptop-Project-Boosts-Desktop-Linux.xhtml Schweitzer, D. 2006, ‘Malware Challenges in A Cross-Platform World’, Computerworld, vol. 40, no. 22, pp. 32-32. Vaughan-Nichols, S. 2005, ‘Linux Lasts Longer’, PC Magazine, vol. 24, no. 9, pp. 64-65. Read More