On Thu, 2004-11-04 at 11:07, Rui Miguel Seabra wrote: > On Wed, 2004-11-03 at 12:06 -0500, Scot L. Harris wrote: > > Can't get much more free than Apache and sendmail. :) If you are > > talking about the OS I think you purchase that along with the hardware. > > So it is a sunk cost. I don't think Apple sells systems without their > > operating system. But I could be wrong about that. > > Yes I'm talking about the whole. It's just the same problem as when > buying a "pc" laptop, it almost always comes with Windows and you get to > pay for it even if you don't want it. > But if he has the G4 or G5 hardware already then why not use the OS that came with it? I believe an Apple system is fully capable of supporting a small to medium web site and email services quite easily. From what I have seen Apple does a good job of setting up their software and hardware. Loading linux on such a system is not going to be a cake walk. And I suspect there are not many people that have done so. As such there will be few people to provide assistance if/when he needs help. > > > > Instead of using expensive equipment (G4 or G5) you might consider using > > > > some cheap Intel or AMD based box. You can get good boxes for 300 to > > > > 400 dollars that will be more than sufficient to handle a small site > > > > with low volume traffic. > > > > > > This might be a good option... > > > > If you are hung up on using "free" software I think that would be the > > best option. > > No one is "hung up" os using Free Software... > > http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html > > ... since that's not a limitation but a choice. And a much better one > than choosing to be a subject to "owners" of socially harmfull software, > like proprietary software. Ah, philosophy. Got it. You are right it is a choice. If he is not that familiar with OS X and is more familiar with Linux then getting a cheap Intel or AMD box and loading Linux is probably the best option. If he is unable to buy new hardware and has a G4 or G5 available then he is going to be better off using OS X instead of working through potential problems trying to get some linux version running on that hardware. If he was talking about using Microsoft because it came with the system again that would be his choice. However in that case he has IMHO a clearly better choice of running Linux on that same hardware. That is my bias. :) And I still think you are dismissing what appears to be a very good OS. It may not do everything exactly the way BSD does it but it has a lot of the right ideas and has implemented many things better in some ways than even Linux. -- Scot L. Harris webid@xxxxxxxxxx Q: What's the difference between USL and the Titanic? A: The Titanic had a band.
