Best server OS for a school network of 90 clients

[btarunr]

A government administered school in my village is going overkill with its IT infrastructure expansion. They are setting up a 50 client lab, 20 in the offices and the rest in the library. The principal, a good friend of mine, was about to invest heavily in consultation companies. I stopped him and bought time for this week to figure out a suitable server OS that would drive two reasonably powerful AMD Opteron based servers. I hope you can visualise the network. Based on the following factors, help me choose a server OS:

1. Stability and low running cost
2. Security
3. Administrative control on clients (to make sure the kids aren't fooling around)
4. Optimal utilisation of system resources
5. Easy to troubleshoot

Vote in the poll.

Thank You

 

[craigwhiteside]

Windows Server 2005 RC2 is best IMO

 

[Deleted member 3]

Windows 2000 is best , at school you wont need any fancy features or a nice looking gui

He asked about the server.



I think Win2k3 is easiest to manage, finding Windows admins is easier than Linux admins. Administrative controls are done via OU's in the AD very easily. Stability shouldn't be an issue with server OSes. If they are unstable they have no right to exist.
Performance wise 2k3 does pretty good.

 

[Disparia]

What are the client machines running?

Does the person in charge know the in's and out's of either distro? or Server 2003 for that matter?

 

[btarunr]

The clients run Windows XP (genuine) with a lot of stuff disabled like themes, etc.

Based on the infrastructure, the school would hire an admin. Linux/BSD is not a very rare thing here.

 

[Disparia]

Just checking

Here we're hard pressed to find someone like that. Server 2003 with policies, permissions, RIS, etc - no problem. But doing the equivalent with linux? I'd have to do some research and test lab.

 

[btarunr]

Adding restrictions to client machines isn't a tough thing with Linux, though I doubt how I'd keep restrictions on applications, which was piece-of-cake using a NT4 server.

Just that running cost could be reduced using RHEL as far are client licenses go.

 

[Deleted member 3]

Adding restrictions to client machines isn't a tough thing with Linux

What alternative is there to the AD in Linux? Samba doesn't offer anything useful here.

 

[btarunr]

true.

SaMBa merely is for resource sharing. But the Linux hosts would proxy the internet line. You can have a certain degree of control here. Blocking apps and account-level restrictions is no no with Linux.

With Linux I could evade the client licensing fee. A very tricky situation.

 

[Deleted member 3]

true.

Adding restrictions to client machines isn't a tough thing with Linux

Care to explain then? How for example do I restrict a user from accessing the control panel when using a Linux server? Can it be done at all?

Edit: Other than using Windows files in the netlogon dir which isn't very user friendly. I recall doing something along those lines some years ago. Worked really crappy. Could have improved over time, or I'm just an idiot

 

[btarunr]

restrictions in context of what online resource a student can access and what he can't because like I said, the hosts are going to proxy the internet.

rgd AD, there's no alternative.

 

[Deleted member 3]

restrictions in context of what online resource a student can access and what he can't because like I said, the hosts are going to proxy the internet.

rgd AD, there's no alternative.

Still, doesn't an ISA server offer more options here for Windows clients? Again via the AD though.
IE allow protocols, ports, logon times/dates all based on user account/group membership.

 

[cdawall]

i vote ubunto just cause i like using it and i have never had a crashing issue on my servers but those are converted from old home pcs

 

[Deleted member 3]

i vote ubunto just cause i like using it and i have never had a crashing issue on my servers but those are converted from old home pcs

Any argument besides personal preference? IE why do you prefer it? Did you have other distros/BSD's/Unices/Windows servers crash on you? Do you actually have users on you servers with restricted rights?

 

[btarunr]

Still, doesn't an ISA server offer more options here for Windows clients? Again via the AD though.
IE allow protocols, ports, logon times/dates all based on user account/group membership.

sure does. and to discuss this exact tussle between features and price, I started this thread. I am humbled by your interest being a supermod.

the crucial factor is the costs involved in licensing the clients, something that can be evaded if we use a *nix/BSD. Is Windows Server worth paying for the client licenses or can I end up saving that (and end up losing on AD) by using Linux (while still having decent control on students' internet access and whitelisting/blacklisting websites, allowing downloads, etc.

 

[Deleted member 3]

sure does. and to discuss this exact tussle between features and price

Price is a hard one, Windows Licenses usually cost more. However a Linux/Unix admin costs more than a Windows one. If you count in the hassle in getting free source environments to work the discussion can go either way.
There are plenty of articles on this, half of them favor Linux the others favor Windows. I think the ease of administration eventually becomes an issue.

For example, what kind of school is it? If they teach IT related things the school might have the knowledge to manage Linux already, ie no extra costs.
However if they teach 16 girls who want to become pretty for a living they might be better offer hiring a single Windows admin who could manage everything on his own. ie the savings in operational costs outweigh the licenses.


The company I work at works mainly with open source stuff, ie Linux servers, thin clients logging on to those servers. We use a call registration system called PHProjekt instead of Topdesk for example. Finding personnel with the right knowledge is hard.

I have to admit, I have no clue where the turn point is, in network size for example. I would simply make two calculations, one of each situations and present both to the schools directors, whoever has to give the green light. Offering alternatives is a positive thing in any situation.
Whichever is cheaper, I would say the Microsoft way will be the easiest. If the finances are there it would certainly not be a bad choice like some people would claim.

I started this thread. I am humbled by your interest being a supermod.

Yay, finally someone that actually bothers to suck up to me

 

[craigwhiteside]

hmm maybe use solaris 10?

 

[btarunr]

hmm maybe use solaris 10?

Solaris has its own issues with licensing and hardware compatibility. Solaris is an awesome db server OS (and I can understand you're looking at it from the context of a school network where records are maintained) but it's a bit hi-fi I'd assume and I don't think Solaris has any better user administrative features compared to Linux when dealing with Windows clients. Thanks!!

Say can you pl modify my poll so I could see who voted for what? sometimes besides volumes you also have to note on the quality of the voter. tks.

 

[craigwhiteside]

Say can you pl modify my poll so I could see who voted for what? sometimes besides volumes you also have to note on the quality of the voter. tks.

i would if i had permissions

 

[craigwhiteside]

solaris has improved on its hardware compatibility and many other things, i think you should at least give it a go, you can get it for free
IMO,

http://www.sun.com/software/solaris/get.jsp

ill actually try this out and give a review on it, i have a rack server just sitting here

 

[wiak]

FreeBSD hands down
easy installation, best security out of the box, based on the good old Berkeley Software Distribution
ports are the best software collection ever!, just "cd /usr/ports/program & make install clean" and it will install it and all the needed packages
http://www.freebsd.org/

 

[btarunr]

Price is a hard one,

We were actually ready for a full-fledged Windows setup, just thought we could save a little here and there.

Windows Licenses usually cost more. However a Linux/Unix admin costs more than a Windows one. If you count in the hassle in getting free source environments to work the discussion can go either way.
There are plenty of articles on this, half of them favor Linux the others favor Windows. I think the ease of administration eventually becomes an issue.

Finding a *nix admin isn't an expensive thing here in India. Linux pretty-much rules the enterprise segment, for obvious reasons that it's comparitivly less expensive. So actually admins are trained in both. An average Indian admin would have both MSCE and RHCE in his belt.

For example, what kind of school is it? If they teach IT related things the school might have the knowledge to manage Linux already, ie no extra costs.

That's just a high-school in a rural setup.

The company I work at works mainly with open source stuff, ie Linux servers, thin clients logging on to those servers. We use a call registration system called PHProjekt instead of Topdesk for example. Finding personnel with the right knowledge is hard.

I have to admit, I have no clue where the turn point is, in network size for example. I would simply make two calculations, one of each situations and present both to the schools directors, whoever has to give the green light. Offering alternatives is a positive thing in any situation.
Whichever is cheaper, I would say the Microsoft way will be the easiest. If the finances are there it would certainly not be a bad choice like some people would claim.

Yes it looks that way. My high-school used to run good'ol NT 4.0 SP6. (server and workstation)

 

[craigwhiteside]

Yes it looks that way. My high-school used to run good'ol NT 4.0 SP6. (server and workstation)

then in that case stick with a windows environment, go with windows server 2003 standard/enterprise or go with the windows server 2005 RC2

 

[btarunr]

or go with the windows server 2005 RC2

Are you recommending the use of a release-candidate OS? 2k3 looks fine, 2k5 RC2 isn't a fully stable product that I can get support from Microsoft.....or can I?

 

[cdawall]

Any argument besides personal preference? IE why do you prefer it? Did you have other distros/BSD's/Unices/Windows servers crash on you? Do you actually have users on you servers with restricted rights?

i ran windows servers for a while and they were down a lot more than my ub, i uninstalled windows server 03 and put ubuntu i believe it was 5.x originally now its 6.6LTS, but it has gone down maybe half as often

my current servers

P4 HT 3.2ghz, an MSI neo something mobo, 512mb supertalent DDR400, antec 450watt
celeron 533mhz, Dell mobo, 256mb PC133, Dell PSU
Amd Athlon XP 1400+, ECS mobo, 512mb Mushkin DDR266 (flashed@333), 300watt PSU

all of them have ubuntu 6.6LTS on them but i only have the celeron running now, mainly since i moved i havent had a chance to set the others up