Hi,

I recommend that Esenthel provide an SDK for Linux dedicated only for servers (or at least) and obtained by stripping the current SDK from platform specific code and by providing only the classes that are relevant for the server part (no need for Sound, Gfx, Physics, ...).

Most developers like to run their servers under Linux rather than windows. And it's not obvious what changes should be made to get a functional code optimized for Linux.

100% agree with you. My project is not yet advanced enough to need it because i prefer Windows Server . But later i think i will need it.

(02-14-2012 05:08 PM)Baccari Wrote:  (no need for Sound, Gfx, Physics, ...)

Physics could be needed if we want server side physics.

Quote:Physics could be needed if we want server side physics.

Yes, Physics should remain. Sorry!

Quote:i prefer Windows Server . But later i think i will need it

IMHO Linux is by far better than Windows for running server applications. It's has better performance and lower costs.

Quote:

Quote:i prefer Windows Server . But later i think i will need it

IMHO Linux is by far better than Windows for running server applications. It's has better performance and lower costs.

Do you have any references? Sounds more like a opinion then a fact.

(02-14-2012 07:18 PM)Dynad Wrote:  

Quote:

Quote:i prefer Windows Server . But later i think i will need it

IMHO Linux is by far better than Windows for running server applications. It's has better performance and lower costs.

Do you have any references? Sounds more like a opinion then a fact.

Yes it sound like , i like windows because after comparing 1 month with Debian i found that i was wasting less time on Windows Server (to type all the commands on Linux). But none is best this is mainly what the user prefers (i need to agree also that the security on Linux is better and cost nothing).

Facts:

linux - harder to operate, zero licence costs, better performance
windows - easy to operate, licence costs, worse performance

(02-14-2012 07:55 PM)Demostenes Wrote:  Facts:

linux - harder to operate, zero licence costs, better performance
windows - easy to operate, licence costs, worse performance

Those are no facts if its not proven with results/benchmarks, are you gonna buy a Audi instead of a Mercedes because some dudes tell you that the Audi is way better and faster but comfort is for Mercedes etc?... yes? no? so? I don't care.. i buy the car because i like the car..not what's inside the car.

Well the best fact i think would be the operating systems usage for web servers stats from W3techs.

And I think we don't need facts to prove the difference in costs other than the licenses themselves.

And about the ease of operation/administration, first of all Linux has all kind of tools (free) to make every task easier and quicker and secondly, the difficulty comes from the fact that Linux server runs usually in headless mode and without a GUI to gain performance and save resources so i see that as a huge plus because all IO operations would have to pass through the network interface which is the only IO device needed for production server application.

That doesn't tell you anything, people can decide cause how much it will cost per month... between lets say 10 dollar Linux or 15 dollar windows.. the choice will be fast made if its just for running a website..

Still, the smallest saving on hosting service costs makes a difference for some people like myself and it would be nice if we had a small library ready to help us quickly get the server up and running under our favorite OS *Linux*

(02-14-2012 08:40 PM)Dynad Wrote:  

(02-14-2012 07:55 PM)Demostenes Wrote:  Facts:

linux - harder to operate, zero licence costs, better performance
windows - easy to operate, licence costs, worse performance

Those are no facts if its not proven with results/benchmarks, are you gonna buy a Audi instead of a Mercedes because some dudes tell you that the Audi is way better and faster but comfort is for Mercedes etc?... yes? no? so? I don't care.. i buy the car because i like the car..not what's inside the car.

It does not change anything on what I told before. Facts. Every guy working with servers will tell you same thing. Learn to live with it. You obviously have no knowledge how to do business case and proper costs analyzis and you know nothing about systems. Maybe in few years, when you became more experienced, you will understand. And if you want benchmarks, use google. Designing system concept with "I want car, I dont care what is inside" is behaviour of hopeless noob. Or very bad manager, but it this case he has people to do analyzis for him.

For me, i have a VPS who cost 29,89€ per month on Windows Server 2008 R2 x64 for almost a year i'm quite happy with it he do the job i want, MySQL server, web server, FTP server. He has 4 CPU core, 2gb of ram, 80gb of hard drive, 100mbit, server based in France using the Microsoft Hyper-V virtualization environnement. I can run without serious problem 24 or 32 players with Source based game server. I know also another host with server in Germany who offer VPS for 12,99€ (both for Linux and Windows) with 1gb of ram, and 50 gb of hard drive, but do not expect a lot for the cpu performance. The Windows licences for VPS cost a lot less then for a dedicated server because some company have like one Windows licence for 200 VPS. I know a VPS isn't good for a popular game but for a developer it's good and cheap.

(02-15-2012 12:32 PM)Demostenes Wrote:  It does not change anything on what I told before. Facts. Every guy working with servers will tell you same thing.

Yes in matter of fact it does, it changes everything, and it is not facts that linux vs windows = what you say it is, I also know for a fact that the statistics you linked, 36% of people working with website servers disagree with you.

There is also the fact that, many people running Linux as servers can't afford decent hardware to begin with, using a P2, 128Mb mem server for their private DNS routed server just to avoid costs.

(02-15-2012 12:32 PM)Demostenes Wrote:  Learn to live with it. You obviously have no knowledge how to do business case and proper costs analyzis and you know nothing about systems. Maybe in few years, when you became more experienced, you will understand.

Think you should calm down Demostenes in starting bashing people from what you assume is their experience.
Where is your dominate experience in the field? I'd like to know what makes 'you' the most experienced person here.

Considering your cost analyzing, do you really think 15$ a month is such an extreme cost? heck, most hosts and server parks I know even removes that 15$ for windows server when you reach the capacity of 5-10 servers.

Having worked with servers and still are by the way, I disagree I tend to use Windows servers more.

This work includes working on server setups for db servers,webhosts and game hosts.

(02-15-2012 12:32 PM)Demostenes Wrote:  

(02-14-2012 08:40 PM)Dynad Wrote:  

(02-14-2012 07:55 PM)Demostenes Wrote:  Facts:

linux - harder to operate, zero licence costs, better performance
windows - easy to operate, licence costs, worse performance

Those are no facts if its not proven with results/benchmarks, are you gonna buy a Audi instead of a Mercedes because some dudes tell you that the Audi is way better and faster but comfort is for Mercedes etc?... yes? no? so? I don't care.. i buy the car because i like the car..not what's inside the car.

It does not change anything on what I told before. Facts. Every guy working with servers will tell you same thing. Learn to live with it. You obviously have no knowledge how to do business case and proper costs analyzis and you know nothing about systems. Maybe in few years, when you became more experienced, you will understand. And if you want benchmarks, use google. Designing system concept with "I want car, I dont care what is inside" is behaviour of hopeless noob. Or very bad manager, but it this case he has people to do analyzis for him.

You obviously didn't understand the point i was making at all, probably you can't read English very well or see it very personal. After reading several posts from you it seems you think your the smartest person here on earth and everyone else has an IQ of an ape... well excuse me.. but how dare you to talk to me like that. You don't even know me and now your saying what my experience is after making one point. Well i think you can better move on and take a job as a shrink.

So again, it all depends on the situation. A company looks at the requirements and which software suits the most in that case. Not just taking something because its better at something which you maybe don't need at all... Unless you want to drive a Ferrari on a rocky hill because the car can go 300m/h on a solid road...

(02-15-2012 02:45 PM)Dynad Wrote:  So again, it all depends on the situation.

Tell me, where I am telling opposite. I wrote basic facts and which system is more appropriate depends on the need of each project and dozens of other conditions.

Personally I prefer Windows servers, but there is lots of situations, where using Windows platform is pure idiocy. The basic facts I wrote are still valid.

---

(02-14-2012 08:50 PM)Baccari Wrote:  And about the ease of operation/administration, first of all Linux has all kind of tools (free) to make every task easier and quicker and secondly, the difficulty comes from the fact that Linux server runs usually in headless mode and without a GUI to gain performance and save resources so i see that as a huge plus because all IO operations would have to pass through the network interface which is the only IO device needed for production server application.

True. But I am afraid, that these people dont want to understand.