Why Most Servers Run Linux: Historical, Technical, and Economic Reasons

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 set up. Examples such as the "动网论坛" used ASP + Access with virtually no ODBC configuration. Virtual hosts often bundled the web and FTP roots, preventing users from changing configurations. This led to insecure setups where data.mdb files were exposed and could be downloaded directly, revealing plaintext passwords. Over time, Windows hosts were perceived as inefficient and unsafe, especially compared to emerging Linux hosts that supported ZEND and PHP.

Answer 2 – IIS vs. Apache/Nginx/Lighttpd

IIS initially held advantages: built‑in FTP, ASP support without extra software, and a graphical configuration interface suitable for novice admins. However, its closed ecosystem soon hindered support for languages like PHP and Ruby. IIS was also outperformed by Apache, Nginx, and Lighttpd, which used poll and epoll for lightweight, high‑concurrency handling, delivering several times the throughput of IIS. Complex and hard‑to‑debug IIS configurations further discouraged performance tuning, accelerating the shift of web‑server workloads to Linux.

Answer 3 – Practical Game‑Server Experience

A user tried to run a game server on a Windows Server VM following tutorials that required additional vc runtime and dx runtime packages, which were hard to locate. Switching to Ubuntu allowed a simple apt install steamcmd and running server.sh. The same hardware (4 CPU × 8 GB) was more suitable for Linux because Windows consumed a large portion of RAM, making lightweight scenarios better served by Linux.

Answer 4 – Licensing Cost

Windows Server licensing is charged per CPU core, with a typical server costing around ¥100,000, whereas Linux distributions are free, providing a clear economic incentive to choose Linux.

Answer 5 – Ecosystem, Lightweight, and Containers

A professional infrastructure engineer highlighted three Linux strengths: a dominant ecosystem that attracts developers; lightweight distributions like Alpine that enable minimal‑size containers; and native container support, which Windows and macOS lack due to architectural limitations. Since containerization is now essential for server architecture, Linux’s compatibility makes it the preferred platform.

Answer 6 – Microsoft vs. Open Source

Historically, Microsoft’s business model relied on selling Windows and Office, fostering a culture where software usage required payment. Early open‑source contributors, many from academia, built a parallel ecosystem that grew rapidly. Microsoft’s antagonism toward open source eventually softened, but the early advantage given to Linux’s free, community‑driven development cemented its server market share.

Answer 7 – Matthew Effect and Skill Market

The final comment stresses the "Matthew effect": once Linux became dominant, its ecosystem, tooling, and job market reinforced its position. Linux’s Unix compatibility, zero licensing fees, and the fact that learning Linux leads to more employment opportunities for ops engineers further entrenched its dominance over Windows, whose server OS arrived later and struggled to gain traction.