🥇Windows Server or Linux distributions? Choosing a server OS

Operating systems are the cornerstone of the modern industry. On one hand, they consume valuable server resources that could be used for something more useful. On the other hand, the operating system acts as an orchestrator for server applications and transforms a single-task computing unit into a multitasking platform, while also facilitating interaction among all stakeholders with the hardware. Currently, the main trend in server operating systems includes Windows Server along with several Linux distributions of various focuses. Each of these operating systems has its pros, cons, and applications. Today, we will briefly discuss the systems that come with our servers.

Windows Server

This operating system is extremely popular in the corporate segment, even though most ordinary users associate Windows exclusively with the desktop version for PCs. Depending on the tasks and required supported infrastructure, several versions of Windows Server are currently in use by companies, ranging from Windows Server 2003 to the latest version—Windows Server 2019. We provide servers with all the listed operating systems, which includes Windows Server 2003, 2008 R2, 2016, and 2019.

Windows Server 2003 is primarily used to support corporate systems and networks built on Windows XP. Surprisingly, the desktop OS version from Microsoft, which was discontinued about five years ago, is still in operation, as many proprietary software solutions were developed for it at the time. The same applies to Windows Server 2008 R2 and Windows Server 2016—they are the most compatible with old but functional software and are therefore still used today.

The main advantages of Windows-managed servers are relatively simple administration, a substantial amount of information, manuals, and software. Moreover, you cannot do without a Windows server if your company ecosystem includes software or solutions that utilize Microsoft system libraries and core components. Additionally, the RDP technology for user access to server applications and the overall versatility of the system can be highlighted. Furthermore, Windows Server has a lightweight version without a GUI, with resource consumption at the level of a Linux distribution — Windows Server Core, about which we wrote earlier. All Windows-managed servers come with an activated license (which is free for new users).

The downsides of Winserver can be summarized in two parameters: the cost of the license and resource consumption. Among all server OS, Windows Server is the most resource-intensive and requires at least one CPU core and between one and three gigabytes of RAM just to run the core and standard services. This system is not suitable for low-power configurations and has several vulnerabilities associated with RDP and group/user policies.

Most often, Windows Server is intended for managing corporate intranets and ensuring the operability of specific software, working with MSSQL databases, ASP.NET tools, or other software specifically developed for Windows. Still, it is a fully functional OS capable of routing, setting up DNS, or any other service.

Ubuntu

Ubuntu is one of the most popular and steadily evolving distributions in the Linux family, first released in 2004. Once dubbed the 'Linux for the home user' in a Gnome shell, over time, Ubuntu became the default server OS due to its extensive community and ongoing development. The latest popular version is 18.04, but we also supply servers running 16.04, and about a week ago, the release of version 20.04, which introduced a multitude of enhancements.

If Windows Server was used as the OS to support specific and Windows-oriented software, then Ubuntu as a Linux distribution is a story about open source and web development. Indeed, Linux servers are used to host web servers on Nginx or Apache (as opposed to Microsoft IIS), to work with PostgreSQL and MySQL, or with popular scripting languages for development. An Ubuntu server is well-suited for routing and traffic management services.

The advantages include lower resource consumption compared to Windows Server, as well as the native console operation and package managers that all Unix systems offer. Moreover, Ubuntu, being originally a 'desktop home Unix', is quite user-friendly, which simplifies its administration.

The main drawback is the Unix nature, with all its implications. While Ubuntu is user-friendly—relatively speaking against other Linux systems—working with it, especially in a full server configuration—exclusively via the terminal—requires certain skills. Furthermore, Ubuntu is more oriented towards personal use and may not always be suitable for corporate scenarios.

Debian

Ironically, Debian is the ancestor of the highly popular Ubuntu that we mentioned earlier. The first Debian build was published over 25 years ago—in 1994—and the Debian code formed the basis of Ubuntu. Essentially, Debian is one of the oldest and most hardcore distributions in the Linux family. Despite its similarities, unlike its 'descendant', Debian did not achieve the same level of user-friendliness as the younger system. However, this provides its own advantages. Debian is more flexible compared to Ubuntu and can undergo deeper configurations, effectively addressing a range of specific tasks, including corporate ones.

The main advantage of Debian is its greater security and stability compared to Ubuntu and, even more so, Windows. And of course, like any Linux system, it has low resource consumption, especially as a server OS managed through the terminal. Furthermore, the Debian community is open source, so this system is primarily focused on correct and effective work with free solutions.

However, flexibility, hardcore nature, and security come at a price. Debian is developed by the open-source community without a clear core through a system of branch masters, with all the implications that entails. At any given time, Debian has three versions: stable, unstable, and testing. The problem is that the stable branch of development seriously lags behind the testing branch, which means that outdated parts and modules can often be found in the core. All of this results in the need for manual core rebuilding or even switching to the testing branch if your tasks exceed the capabilities of the stable version of Debian. Ubuntu does not have such version mismatch issues: there, developers release a stable LTS version of the system every two years.

CentOS

Now, let's wrap up our discussion on server OS RUVDS on CentOS. Against the backdrop of the more substantial Ubuntu and, even more so, Debian, CentOS appears like a teenager. Although the system has not been popular among the masses for as long as Debian or Ubuntu, its first version was released at the same time as Ubuntu, back in 2004.

CentOS is mainly used for virtual servers, as it is even less resource-intensive than Ubuntu or Debian. We provide configurations running two versions of this OS: CentOS 7.6.1810 and the older CentOS 7.2.1510. The primary use case is corporate tasks. CentOS is about work. Never intended to be a home-user system, as was the case with Ubuntu, CentOS was developed from the start as a RedHat-like distribution based on open-source code. It is precisely this heritage from RedHat that gives CentOS its main advantages—focus on solving corporate tasks, stability, and security. The most common use case for the system is web hosting, where CentOS outperforms other Linux distributions.

However, the system has its drawbacks. A more conservative development and update cycle than with Ubuntu means that at some point, you will have to deal with vulnerabilities or issues that have already been resolved in other distributions. The update and component installation system is also different: no apt-get, just yum and RPM packages. Additionally, CentOS is not very suitable for hosting and working with container solutions like Docker/k8s, where Ubuntu and Debian clearly excel. This is important since the virtualization of web servers and applications through containerization has gained traction in DevOps in recent years. And of course, CentOS has a much smaller community compared to the more popular Debian and Ubuntu.

Instead of output

As you can see, any OS has its pros and cons and has carved out its own niche. Windows servers stand apart — in the Microsoft environment, so to speak, there is its own atmosphere and rules of operation.
All Linux distributions are similar in terms of resource consumption but have their own specific features and differences depending on the task at hand. Ubuntu is easier to use, Debian is more finely configurable. CentOS can serve as a replacement for the paid RedHat, which is important if you need a complete corporate OS in a Unix environment. However, it is weak when it comes to containerization and application virtualization. In any case, you can contact our specialists, and we will select the necessary solution and configuration based on your needs.