Red Hat Enterprise Linux is fantastic. It is an inexpensive solution that has excellent security, performance, and stability, and also lots of features. I specifically like that the solution has features that simplify adoption for non-Linux users, which makes it easier for administrators too. RHEL also has good customer support. In addition, RHEL enables me to deploy current applications as well as emerging workloads across all virtualized hybrid cloud and multi-cloud environments, which I find to be very helpful. Besides the stability and reliability of the OS, it provides a great user experience. Moreso, the fact that it is open-source and leading the open-source market trends and technologies speaks for itself. Although RHEL has a lot to offer, sometimes it can be difficult during disaster recovery. But if you know that ahead of time, you can plan accordingly. And their documentation definitely has room for improvement.
In the past I have used Centos. Generally it was good, but the reason why I switched was because it used to be very stable and now it is not. Its operating system used to be great but when the updates came out, something changed. Additionally, if you are new to using Centos, the initial setup is not that straightforward unless you have prior experience with Linux and know your way around. (In which case installation won’t be difficult.) I also found that CentOS didn’t scale as well as I expected it to. For my needs, I was also hoping it would have more options built into the wizard.
Conclusion: Although CentOS is a very efficient product and is very powerful with a lot of capabilities, I would still recommend RHEL. On a scale of one to ten, I would rate RHEL an eight. As someone who has used other systems, I can say from experience that Red Hat is one of the best - specifically in terms of its ability and consistency of the operating system.
Regional Manager/ Service Delivery Manager at ASPL INFO Services
Oct 22, 2021
Hi @Netanya Carmi ,
Key Differences Between a Windows Server and a Windows Desktop
Here are the key differences between a Windows server and a Windows desktop.
1. Windows Server Supports More Memory
One of the main differences between a Windows server and desktop is the amount of memory each can support. A desktop running Windows 10 Enterprise has a 4 GB memory limit on an X86 and a 2TB limit on an X64. These numbers are greatly increased depending on the Windows server version. You can view the memory limitations for the Windows and Windows server releases on the Microsoft Developer site.
2. Windows Server Uses CPUs More Efficiently
In general, a server OS is more efficient at using its hardware than a desktop OS, especially a CPU; therefore, if you install Alike on a server OS, you are taking full advantage of the hardware installed on your server, which also allows Alike to offer optimal performance.
3. More Network Connections Allowed on a Windows Server
With a desktop version of Windows, network connections are limited to 10-20. A Windows server is not locked down to just 20 network connections; therefore, a Windows server can support well beyond 20 network connections based on your hardware’s capability.
4. The Server OS is Configured for Background Tasks
By default, server editions of the Windows OS are configured to give priority to background tasks and services, whereas the desktop editions focus on foreground. While priority can be changed, the desktop edition’s management does not yield the same performance results.
Windows Server integrates well with all Microsoft and many other mainstream solutions.
Building a Failover Cluster is comparatively much easier in Windows Server than with other solutions. We really like the ease of use, stability, and performance of this solution. You get a good active directory that offers consistently evolving features that scales easily. Windows Server supports more memory and uses CPUs more efficiently.
Windows Server requires a lot of monthly maintenance with vulnerability management. From a security aspect, this should be improved. We would like to see a command-line version of Windows Server. Overall this solution can be very expensive.
One popular feature of Windows 10 is its connectivity with mobile devices and ability to make cabless connections with external devices. Windows 10 has improved functionality and better integration between the networks and Windows 10 core system. The new subsystem for Linux is great. Windows 10 also offers a very good gaming option. which many of our team members thoroughly enjoy. It is a very stable solution with flexible scalability.
Windows 10 gets a lot of updates and the automatic updates have caused some problems with our team, resulting in losing files or work. There are instances where updates have caused system crashes and failures. The process needs to be tweaked a bit. The enterprise version has many options, like games that are really intended for home use. The install process can be a bit complex and takes a lot of time to deploy. Windows 10 is a very expensive solution.
These are both great solutions by an industry leader.
Windows Server is a very robust and powerful on-premises hardware. We were looking to really step up our connections and Windows 10 can only handle about 10 or 20 connections, whereas Windows Server can handle an excess of 50,000 connections. We also needed more memory and more power. Windows10 Pro offers 2TB of RAM, while Windows Server can go to 24TB. Windows Server hardware can also handle more cores and processors; it has 64 sockets to Windows 10’s 2 sockets. Windows Server is the best solution for our organizational needs.
PeerSpot takes a user-centered approach to creating product comparisons that help IT decision-makers arrive at informed decisions. Instead of relying on the word of the companies that create the technological solutions, they go to the users themselves. Real users offer true feedback without any of the partiality that the solutions’ vendors may have. This is a place where peers in the tech worl...
@Netanya Carmi,This is an insightful article.
But in my opinion, Rocky Linux (as a potential successor) of CentOS, will be the next big thing in the open-source world, as already many solutions are supporting it though only the BETA version for now.
Still, your article is quite a heads up. Thanks!
I too would like to see this list expand to all of the relevant Linux distributions. I'm really surprised to see Oracle Linux on here and not see Rocky or Alma. As is shown in this chart generated from data provided by the Fedora project: https://rocky-stats.tiuxo.com/static/el_by_distro_line.png
Rocky and Alma are far more relevant and widely used than Oracle.