Linux vs. Windows "Arma-Dedicated Server"

[mr.g-c 6]

Hi to continue from a other thread we mis-used for start a discussion about this, i'd thought i open a new thread for it.

As i written in the other thread, i read a long time ago in a other forums that the Linux dedicated server (don't remember if it was OFP or Arma) would be minimal quicker.

Now there are a lot of people (windows user though )which claiming the opposite.

Now, which one is fater, and please explain detailed you opinion "WHY"!

Regards, Christian

[mattxr 9]

i guess it all depends on the machine and bandwith /internet connection

[baddo 0]

I don't even care.

Use the tool which is better for the job at hand.

[whisper 0]

Game is programmed for Windows, Linux is "only" a port, so there is much chance the Windows code is running it a bit better.

Ofc, it depends on how the port has been done.

And how both servers were installed. Like using a correct kernel on the linux box, I'm no Windows expert, but I guess there's some things to do under Windows to make it run game servers better.

As a matter of taste, I way prefer Linux.

I can install it for free, I can manage it the way I like it, I've better knowledge of how it works and can be protected, etc....

[sickboy 13]

I go with Whisper.

I think the Windows version works better, because it was written for it. But it really depends on how the port is done.

Also, the support for the Windows ArmA Server, by BI, seems much better, this could also be a reason for someone to take it.

I myself prefer Windows over Linux in any other environment than LAMP.

I haven't tested the same hardware with "Windows Server 2008" and "Some Linux Distro", so until there's anyone who did, I dont think anyone can give a valid answer, apart from Windows or Linux fan-replies

[SWAT_BigBear 0]

I tried Linux many years back.......If I had time to spend setting game servers up with it, I would have stayed with it.

Windows is only + $20 US more per month, and you gotta admit....much easier to set up game servers and or web hosting. Security is in the personalization of the setups on each.

When I 1st tried Linux vs Windows....... we seen no difference running RavenShield game servers, but OFP did seem a lil smother w/Linux.

I'm sure things have changed over the years, but having limited time for hosting has kept me with the ease of Windows.

[whisper 0]

\o/ Let's do a "Nux so pwns Doz!!!"

Price : I've the choice between a 0$ perfectly legal box, and either a windows license to pay or using an illegal copy.

=> no discussion, I chose the 0$ legal solution.

This because I'm lucky enough to have access to the hardware for free.

"Ease of use" : It's mostly all in what you do know of the OS you're using. I'm pretty sure I'm as fast and comfortable as any Windows user in updating my Linux ArmA server.

Patching the game takes me a few minutes, adding addons barely over 1 minute, etc...

Remote access over Windows is a complete stranger process to me, GUI I find a waste of ressources if not asking for security holes (I know, I know, it's misconceptions! ), and moreover it's not reactive enough for me (stutter and such ...)

I'm using Unix-like environnement pretty much all the time at work => I'm used to it, I'm efficient with it

=> I use Nux.

So apart from real possible performance issues with Nux version of the ArmA server, which is still to be proven , I'll side with Linux. Not that I want everyone to do so

[ADO_Lesicilien 0]

I joined whisper for the price.

After I think that is also a facility administrator.

Personally before ofp I did not know of any linux and since then my server turned on linux.

This is a can taste and color.

[dustoff 0]

I am running windows 2008 server and it cost nothing extra per month from my server company.

Seems to be plenty fast on a quad core machine with a 100md port .