At 02:43 PM 4/2/2002, you wrote:
Jeff,Thanks for the response . . . But if that is the case, then why spend so muchon a RAQ4 if I can build a PC that will do the same for much much less? What about the network card? Is it just a 100 Mbs card? Why the cost difference? John Jeff Edwards wrote: > > >I know that there was a question on this in the past, but I did not find > it. I > >need to be educated on this subject. >> >What is the difference between a Raq4 Server and a P4 PC running as a Linux> >server? > > The Raq4 uses an AMD K6-2 450mhz CPU. The P4 is Faster. > > Is there a GUI interface that will allow Linux PCs to run as a Hosting > Server > like the Raq4? >> Yes, There are several. Plesk, Ensim, Cpanel, H-Sphere (just to name a Few)> > My 2 cents > > Jeff >
The Cobalt systems were designed for newbies. We do not necessarily know about linux or want to. The system allows up to set up a server and use it. With a bit more knowledge we can make is more secure.
The GUI built into the system allows for hosting as well as maintenance.Cobalt took Red Hat 6.2 and modified it, removed part of it and then canned it for the machine. They removed some features that can be good yet allow too much access for the standard hosting machine. Many people want more features than what come on the machine. Yet they have sold thousands as they are.
If you are a linux admin, you can get more for your money elsewhere. You also will have to administer the machine you build more. Some of the interfaces can cost almost as much as the machine. The Raq4 is designed to host up to 200 sites. The Plesk application would cost $600 for that. The XTR can host more. It would cost $800 for that.
Newbies will continue to go with Cobalts, or those with less time available for maintenance. Experienced linux administrators with more time on their hands will go the other way.
Some do both. Each has to make his own decision as you will.