[Freeswitch-users] What's better Unix ro Windows? LOL

[Roger Castaldo]

Given that an idle Linux machine properly configured will always consume
less CPU and ram than any widows machine I have ever used my vote is for
Linux
On Jul 25, 2012 8:08 PM, "Sean Devoy" <sdevoy at bizfocused.com> wrote:

> I really hope this does not blow up into an ideological jihad, but I am
> curious what people think and if they have any evidence to support their
> claims.  I am in fact a long time windows developer (anyone remember
> windows 2.2 – that was hard shit).  I have chosen what may be a unique
> approach to FS “Configuration, Command and Control”.****
>
> ** **
>
> I started using FS by building it on Centos 5.n.  Fighting, scratching and
> clawing it into a working multi-tenant switch.   Looking back, everything I
> needed to do was in the email tree, I just didn’t know what to ask.  I have
> now moved FS on to a “production” VPS server for $30 a month with amazing
> success. See it here: http://www.synapseglobal.com/voip_services.php  It
> comes prebuilt with Centos and FS latest build compiled and ready to go.
>  That’s not why I am writing though.  Their tech support is adamant that it
> can handle up 12 CONCURRENT CALLS at the base configuration.****
>
> ** **
>
> I learned about IPTABLES and FAIL2BAN and like them very much.  However, I
> still work better/faster/surer in my Windows environment.  So, I have taken
> what some might think is the worst possible approach: Configure and Control
> my Centos FS Server from my own ASP.NET Web Application (hosted
> elsewhere).  My approach is to use the socket interface to send commands
> and use programmatic SFTP to the SHH shell for XML file exchange.  I am
> about 85% done with version 1.0 and very pleased with it.  I hope to have
> customers be able to login and modify their own configurations (call
> routes, IVRs, extensions mapping to devices line keys, Cisco spa504g
> provisioning, etc).  Other device provisioning is in the pipe, but we have
> all 504Gs here and the provisioning code has been a tremendous help.****
>
> ** **
>
> Anyway, that is how I got to the odd work configuration, now I would like
> a discussion:****
>
> My belief is that the “slim profile” of Centos will allow FS to handle
> greater load on a given hardware profile than could be handled by FS on
> Windows with the same hardware.  I would like to AVOID the issues of
> security for this discussion, I firmly believe that you will provide better
> security on the platform that you understand the best.  Let’s just talk
> RAM, MIPS, NICs and FS performance and other issues I might be missing.***
> *
>
> ** **
>
> Should a Windows guy go with FS on Windows or do you really get more bang
> for your buck in a Unix environment?****
>
> ** **
>
> I look forward to reading your thoughts.****
>
> ** **
>
> Sean****
>
> ** **
>
> _________________________________________________________________________
> Professional FreeSWITCH Consulting Services:
> consulting at freeswitch.org
> http://www.freeswitchsolutions.com
>
> 
> 
>
> Official FreeSWITCH Sites
> http://www.freeswitch.org
> http://wiki.freeswitch.org
> http://www.cluecon.com
>
> Join Us At ClueCon - Aug 7-9, 2012
>
> FreeSWITCH-users mailing list
> FreeSWITCH-users at lists.freeswitch.org
> http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users
> UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users
> http://www.freeswitch.org
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.freeswitch.org/pipermail/freeswitch-users/attachments/20120725/12964e7f/attachment.html