Why Do Most Servers Run Linux? Multiple Answers Explaining the Shift

Answer 1 – Early Windows Server Era

About twenty years ago, the Windows Server + IIS + ASP + Access stack was popular for low‑traffic small‑business sites because it was simple to use. A Chinese forum called “动网论坛” was built with ASP + Access and required no ODBC configuration. Later, the same company released “动网新闻” and a DLL‑wrapped version called “动易”. Many domestic virtual hosts advertised support for “动易组件”. However, Windows hosts often exposed the underlying .mdb database files, allowing anyone to download them and view plaintext passwords. This security flaw led inexperienced users to rename data.mdb to data.asp to hide the file.

Answer 2 – IIS vs. Open‑Source Web Servers

IIS initially had advantages such as built‑in FTP, ASP support without extra software, and a graphical configuration interface suitable for novice administrators. Over time, Windows became too closed: IIS bound tightly to ASP.NET, offered poor support for emerging languages (PHP, Ruby, etc.), and its configuration grew complex and hard to debug. Performance-wise, lightweight servers like Apache, Nginx, and Lighttpd—built on poll and epoll —delivered several times the concurrency of IIS. These factors caused the web‑server market to shift from Windows to Linux.

Answer 3 – Practical Game‑Server Experience

A user tried to run a Paladins server on a rented Windows Server, struggling with missing VC and DirectX runtimes and cumbersome installation steps. Switching to Ubuntu allowed a simple apt install steamcmd and running server.sh, eliminating the hassle and reducing memory waste compared to the Windows setup.

Answer 4 – Licensing Cost

Windows Server charges per CPU core, with a legitimate license costing around ¥100,000, whereas Linux distributions are free.

Answer 5 – Infrastructure Perspective

An infrastructure engineer highlights three Linux strengths: (1) ecosystem dominance—most server‑side stacks (Java, Go, Node) already run on Linux; (2) lightweight distributions like Alpine enable minimal‑size containers, making deployment flexible and efficient; (3) native container support—Linux can run containers directly, while Windows and macOS face limitations that hinder containerization.

Answer 6 – Microsoft vs. Open Source

Historically, Microsoft opposed open source; Bill Gates once wrote a letter condemning hobbyists who contributed unpaid code. This stance conflicted with the academic community that drove early open‑source growth. Over time, Microsoft’s position shifted, and it now embraces open source.

Answer 7 – Historical and Economic Analysis

One contributor warns against attributing the result to a single cause, noting the Matthew effect: early dominance creates a feedback loop. Early Windows Server (NT) arrived late (1993) and only became mainstream around 2000, while Linux (kernel released in 1991) offered a free, Unix‑compatible environment. The free cost, seamless command‑line compatibility, and abundant learning resources (e.g., RH certification) made Linux the preferred platform for new engineers, whereas Windows lacked comparable job opportunities.