Re: [TCLUG:18690] A couple of questions

[David Wood <jbevren@yahoo.com>]

On Thu, 8 Jun 2000, Dave Sherohman wrote:

> Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2000 11:25:59 -0500 (CDT)
> From: Dave Sherohman <esper@usinternet.com>
> Reply-To: tclug-list@mn-linux.org
> To: tclug-list@mn-linux.org
> Subject: Re: [TCLUG:18690] A couple of questions
> 
> Larry said:
> > 1.  Would linux be a viable solution for a server in a cross-platform
> > workstation setting?  (Both as a file server and a mail server)
> 
> Absolutely.  Serving files to Windows boxes is what samba's all about and
> any decent (non-local) mail client will recognize POP and/or IMAP, both of
> which are well-supported by a range of *nix servers.

Not to mention the priceless ability to serve the same files to unix and
macintosh platforms as well!

> > 3.  Are there any additional hardware requirements that we should be
> > aware of?
> 
> Nope.  In general, Linux tends to run much better than Windows on lower-end
> hardware.  (If you have any old 486s laying around, you could run a Linux mail
> server and (light-duty) file server off one of them...)

You know that restriction with the unbuffered UARTs? (ie 8250, 16450)  My
cousing ran a 3-wire nullmodem interface from a 386/40 to his personal box
at the other end of the house at <gasp> 115200bps.  There was rarely a
dropped packet, and bandwidth was rougly 9k/sec on the NFS share he ran on
the 386.  The machine on the other end was a 486/100.  YMMV, but response
time is pretty decent in linux, which is what makes it so much better on
low-end platforms.

If you do some research, you'll find out that linux supports a large array
of cards that windows 95/NT do not. :)

-David