@People who have a server

[madcow]

How much storage do you currently have?

About 55TB usable between the two boxes.

[MikkoP]

Server 2012 Enterprise. I'd use Ubuntu Server but terminal is so 80s... When they realize it doesn't make you professional if you use just keyboard and a terminal, then I will switch.

[Crypt]

Ubuntu Server 12.04 LTS with ZFS on Linux. Used to use FreeNAS which is a very good option if you're new to network administration and servers.

[Crypt]

Debian because utorrent crashes when I add more than around 4500 - 5000 torrents. rtorrent is perfectly stable with that many torrents.

That is a hell of a lot of torrents in queue.

[alpenwasser]

Server 2012 Enterprise. I'd use Ubuntu Server but terminal is so 80s... When they realize it doesn't make you professional if you use just keyboard and a terminal, then I will switch.

What, no, I like the terminal!

Not because I think it's cool or makes me look professional, but I had to fiddle

around with my dad's Windows PC last week because it was having networking issues,

and I realized (again, it had been a while since I'd needed to touch a Windows machine)

how much I hate all these different subsubsubmenues buried in subsubmenus buried

in submenus buried in menus with all those click-boxes and such.

It just takes me way too long to find the right menu in which the option which I

actually need to change is located (especially when I need to change different options

in multiple menus). On the CLI, I can just look up the commands, enter them and that's it.

It's just much more transparent and straight-forward IMHO. Then again, it might just

be that networking on Win 7 is an atrocious mess, regardless of CLI or GUI (at least

that has been my personal experience sadly).

Anyway, not that want to tell you not to use a GUI. If it works for you then great,

just don't take the CLI away from me (please), because that is working very well for

me.

[MikkoP]

What, no, I like the terminal!

Not because I think it's cool or makes me look professional, but I had to fiddle

around with my dad's Windows PC last week because it was having networking issues,

and I realized (again, it had been a while since I'd needed to touch a Windows machine)

how much I hate all these different subsubsubmenues buried in subsubmenus buried

in submenus buried in menus with all those click-boxes and such.

It just takes me way too long to find the right menu in which the option which I

actually need to change is located (especially when I need to change different options

in multiple menus). On the CLI, I can just look up the commands, enter them and that's it.

It's just much more transparent and straight-forward IMHO. Then again, it might just

be that networking on Win 7 is an atrocious mess, regardless of CLI or GUI (at least

that has been my personal experience sadly).

Anyway, not that want to tell you not to use a GUI. If it works for you then great,

just don't take the CLI away from me (please), because that is working very well for

me.

 

I'm just saying that they should implement graphical interface for the server components too. It's not a big deal to make such a program for them because they know already how they work. I love just pressing one button to add a DNS record or just type in the IP and MAC address to assign a static IP.

[alpenwasser]

I'm just saying that they should implement graphical interface for the server components too. It's not a big deal to make such a program for them because they know already how they work. I love just pressing one button to add a DNS record or just type in the IP and MAC address to assign a static IP.

I hear ya, we all have our preferences. Though I must say I'm currently investigating

making a GUI for a small program I've written (~2,200 lines of code so far, including

comments), and from what I've found out so far, GUI-ifying that program would end up

making the code many times its current size, so the GUI part of the code would be much

larger than the code which actually does the work. I'm definitely a beginner at GUI

programming though, so it might not be that bad in other cases, no idea TBH.

But it has led me to at least consider the possibility that making a GUI for existing

CLI code might not always be as trivial as it sounds to an outsider, even if you do

know the codebase inside-out. And that's leaving aside the problem that good coders

often don't make very good GUI designers, so it might be desireable to have the GUI

part be done by somebody who's actually good at it, which means that the coder of the

core program needs to find somebody who is capable and willing to do that work.

Anyway, it would of course be nice to have both options so that we can all have the

workflow that suits our personal preferences best IMHO.

[madcow]

I'm just saying that they should implement graphical interface for the server components too. It's not a big deal to make such a program for them because they know already how they work. I love just pressing one button to add a DNS record or just type in the IP and MAC address to assign a static IP.

I believe Webmin does this.

 

http://www.webmin.com/index.html

[MikkoP]

I believe Webmin does this.

 

http://www.webmin.com/index.html

 

Hey, thanks for linking this. I could check this out with a virtual machine.