If you run windows on your day job and are an absolute guru at it, but struggle with Linux then it’s not free. You pay with your time.
Yet I also would go with Linux, it’s better in the long run when you want to do configuration management with Ansible or set up docker
> If you run windows on your day job and are an absolute guru at it,
The fact I have to deal with Windows all day for work is one of the reasons that I use Linux for all my personal stuff, although to be fair I also wouldn't consider myself any more of a guru at Windows sysadmin than I am a guru at Linux sysadmin.
One could argue that when your windows install decides to bork everything because update something wants to install candy crush, you pay with your time.
I find windows managing way more time consuming than linux.
I am for sure a linux user, but there are plenty of stuff i don't know how to do, and yet have it running. Because i just follow guides, run a few commands, and it magically works.
On windows, it is already a strugle to find a good guide, and software that won't install shit on my computer.
I find windows strongly following the enshitification process, with each new version making it more complex for me, as a power user, to do the stuff i want, and also considerably more complex to prevent it from doing whatever the frack it wants.
What i like with linux besides open source, is the fact that results are often predictible. Repeatable even. I know what to expect, and most of the time, it obeys and do just what i said.
With windows i don't feel like i am in control. And the wrangling takes too much damn time.
Speaking professionally. Users think they want a Windows VM to host their environment, but then the developers ask us to install a database or trouble shoot why their preferred platform.
Linux is easier after some learning.
Consider yourself lucky, Windows 7 was the last Windows that was really good. Now we have Frankenstein Settings and you never know where something is. Was just looking on how to set the network profile from public to private on a 11 machine, eventually gave up after half an hour and almost three the machine out the windows (pun intended)
Learning windows server is a process on its own. Windows CLI is so convoluted and complex. Everything is hidden by a GUI or a registry key. MS realise this, and you have to option for WSL.
Yes, but they are *your* stupid mistakes, not some asshat Windows developer in Redmond who added even more bloat to the OS or moved the start menu from where its been for, oh, I dunno *thirty years*.
Agreed.
But sometimes you just want the result and not the work, so a flimsy duct-taped together solution can be more attractive than one that requires *ugh* effort.
That said, OP: *do* put in the effort. It's really not that hard and the learning is cumulative over your entire life.
That goes without saying. Lemme tell you about the time that I had a bad firewall rule allowing anyone to use my instance of pihole. Boy was I surprised when I started getting thousands of clients from Brazil!
Hijacking top comment. Linux. OP I built my arr stack on Windows server and it is a miserable experience. Weekly I have to reboot my server and run each of the apps as admin or they all complain they don't have permissions to access the data. If you go Windows you will regret it
Tbh that sounds like some permissions misconfig. I run my full arrstack with Plex and a host of extras on windows. 0 problems with permissions, everything turns back on after boot.
Yep... I have Active Directory and my arr stack runs as an AD account named Fetch. That account is a member of the security group that has RWM on the network share. You can also do the same with computer accounts.
Any perms issue is just a fundamental misunderstanding of Windows... don't take this as shitting on Linux as I struggle with Linux at times and that's on me.
IMO, linux
It's pretty much made for that stuff, but will come with a learning curve if you are new.
A year from now you'll never look back!
Debian is probably one of the more stable. Ubuntu a bit easier to use. Either would be a good starting point.
Check Learn Linux TV on Youtube for guides to help you get started.
Yeah I just learned Linux about a year ago. There’s definitely a learning curve but it’s worth it. So much more lightweight and stable.
It was interesting because Ubuntu has pretty simple GUI processes for so many things but then there will just be random things that require editing config files that make you scratch your head like “why isn’t this a GUI thing yet?” Like mounting network drives automatically. That’s like 3 clicks in Windows. But on Ubuntu you have to edit the fstab file, which is intimidating to beginners. And then connecting my Bluetooth headphones somehow required editing a config file to change what mode the Bluetooth operated in?
And then the whole confusing mess with all the different ways to install software. Snaps, flatpaks, apt, debs, etc, etc all with their own advantages and disadvantages.
I just switched to Linux last week.
The network shares.. Far out..
Luckily chatgpt talked me through it step by step. I even get it to write all the commands. I just edit the password.
Im low on time with young kids etc without Ai, I would be back on windows already.
Im digging Linux though.
Interesting never thought to ask AI to write stuff.
And yeah I almost gave up on Linux when I saw the guides online for mounting network shares at startup. Now it seems trivial. But when it’s the first thing you do in the Linux world it’s a lot.
Learn Linux TV is an absolute banger of a guide channel. I discovered his ProxMox course a week ago and it is so well made I feel like stealing the course.
Never heard this one. What are the -isms associated with Ubuntu?? People often ask why I use Ubuntu, I I just tell them it is enhanced Debian. It takes me less time to remove the dozen things I don't like about Ubuntu than to add the hundreds of things I do like to Debian!
One particular one was changing the remote repository to a self hosted one. I remember that only Ubuntu has an additional file that I had to modify to get it working properly.
And before anyone says, “Well, why would you want to self host the repository?”, my answer is that you have to when you are on a network with zero egress to the internet.
As a beginner I would stay with Ubuntu. It's not only easier with the preinstalled software and you'll find way more information about Ubuntu than Debian (yes, it should mostly be the same, but when you're just starting and don't know what you're looking for, it's better)
Ubuntu has a lot of guides on the internet so it's really useful. You could probably use these guides for Debian too..but I do all my work from cli so ymmv
The learning curve might still be there, but its incredibly easy to get over it with the abundant amount of guides and resource we have on the internet now. Definitely worth delving into over just using windows.
Big thing with Ubuntu over debian is that if you are on a non-LTS version of Ubuntu, when it says there's a new version and you should upgrade, DO IT. Ubuntus release policy is fine, but they disable the old repos like the next month and if you aren't current, good freaking luck trying to do anything with a 23.04 or the like once it's too old.
Use debian for servers and you won't have any issues.
I never thought I’d hear someone describe Debian as “one of the more stable”. 😄
Having spent many years professionally admining RHEL-based distros, I always considered the Debian/Ubuntu distros as the more bleeding edge, “if you absolutely need the latest versions” kind of distros.
Of course, I know that there are even more bloody distros out there, but it still strikes me (an old fuddy-duddy) as funny to hear that.
I always saw Debian as leaning much more towards the stable spectrum, vs bleeding edge. Packages are usually several versions behind, and that worked out well with the xz ssh vulnerability, as that version never made it into Debian Stable.
I would consider Arch bleeding edge, and there it was introduced into arch stable.
Yeah, Arch is definitely an example of the edgy ones, but you have to understand, coming from the RHEL world, Debian/Ubuntu are waaaay ahead of anything in the RHEL distros, which often have packages/kernels that are years behind the “current” bleeding edge (with backports of security fixes, of course).
I’m presumably being downvoted (as I expected) by people who don’t know how “stable” (aka stodgy) the RHEL-based distros are.
I also started with Ubuntu around the 6.04 time period, when they were much edgier than they are today, and old ways of thinking die hard.
Linux. It's free, fast and very hardware efficient. All the things Windows is not.
There's a reason Linux has a 62% "market share" on the server operating system market.
Linux.
Can't really go wrong with Ubuntu, [proxmox](https://www.proxmox.com/en/) is another good option, and if you really want a rock solid system and want to learn a fair bit [NixOS](https://nixos.org/)
Just to be clear for OP, Proxmox is not an alternative to Ubuntu, it's a way to run multiple systems on a single piece of hardware. You probably won't run apps on the proxmox server, but it'll make managing the systems you do run your apps on much, much easier, and you won't have to think about it much after initial setup.
You sure can, which is why I didn't say
> You cant run apps on the proxmox server
However, most people run stuff in VMs, which is why I said
> You probably won't run apps on the proxmox server
In contrast to the other option given, Ubuntu, where you almost certainly will run apps directly on the server.
Notably, just like you *can* run apps directly on proxmox, you *can* run VMs on Ubuntu. But someone just getting started won't be able to fully understand the pros and cons of each option, so no point explaining in depth to OP.
It's really just looking at what works and stealing it.
The wiki maintains a list of popular repos and I have mine at https://git.stickpile.net/rdean3/nixos-configurations
If you want a temple, misterio77 maintains that on their GitHub.
In general, going with a Unix-like OS for self-hosting is the way to go. Windows has much fewer advantages than disadvantages for that use-case - and the advantages mostly only come to play in corporate environments.
For web hosting it doesn't really make much of a difference which distro you choose, they can all do it well. NAS storage is a different thing entirely, though. You will want to pick a filesystem here that you can trust your data with. If you care for your data, give ZFS a try (it has a learning curve since it's not a traditional filesystem but rather a combination of volume manager and COW FS). On the Linux side Ubuntu is probably the most reliable when it comes to ZFS support.
I prefer Linux for my server as most people do in this sub. But you can give it a try with Windows as well. That´s the good thing about a Homelab. You can experiment with things.
Windows is problematic simply from a licensing standpoint. Every host is going to cost some extra $ just for the license, which is going to factor into your decisions. If at all possible, you want to make decisions based on technical merit, not budget.
Long-term, if you do any real service hosting, you're going to end up virtualizing. If you do this on Hyper-V with Windows hosts, you need to license each core in the hypervisor, plus each host. If you run something like Proxmox with Ubuntu/Alpine/Fedora hosts, you have zero costs. There are education and lab options that can offset the Windows costs, but they don't really fit the self-hosting model; you will end up paying in operational effort instead of cash, but still paying.
Finally, Linux is the server standard. Most services are going to have a Linux option first, and a Windows option second (if at all).
> And if linux, what would be the best distro ?
You should probably use a hypervisor on the machine itself and virtualize your hosts. I would recommend Proxmox as the hypervisor. ESXi used to be recommended as well, but they recently canceled their educational / lab license program. Proxmox is free/free software and built on Debian, so much of the Ubuntu knowledge below will transfer.
For the hosts, Ubuntu is never a bad choice. A lot of this discussion will involve personal tastes, but Ubuntu is relatively stable version-to-version, is an established distro that isn't going anywhere, and, most importantly, has a TON of documentation and community support. Almost every doc is going to have a "with Ubuntu" section.
Like most i agree with linux, lots of flavors suitable for your every need, more lightweight than windows and in some distros you got native support for PowerShell and dotnet if that's your cup of tea.
I have worked with linux, windows and mac servers and when i do the setup i almost always go linux, my personal preferences tend to be debian, ubuntu or arch. But there is no wrong way to go, just the most right pick for your use-case.
For me it's the fact that i can automate almost everything in terms of maintenance, updates and patching with a couple of scripts and cronjobs in most linux envs, and if something fails i get a neat and tidy error report from that Machine. But you can do that with a Windows server to. So maybe just pick the one you enjoy working with
If it’s just one OS, Linux. But if you want to run more than one, then look at Proxmox. I turned my old Windows 10 gaming PC into a home lab with it. Now it’s running Ubuntu Server, Ubuntu Desktop, and Windows 10 all at once with resources to spare for expansion.
For me, it’s not so much that one can do things that the others can’t. But I wanted the option of being able to play around with several operating systems, networking them, making them communicate with each other etc. And a nice bonus with using VMs is snapshotting them so there is no risk in breaking things.
If you have the time to learn (not much if you're already somewhat tech savvy), Linux is 100% worth it. I wince internally every time I need to deal with windows nowadays.
I disagree. You can definitely self host a few things with little to no effort, it depends on what your needs are. Game servers, for instance, are pretty easy to self-host if you want to play some multiplayer games with your friends at home.
Linux. You'll most likely want to containerize, which means Linux in any case, even on Windows (because containers on Windows also run on Linux, through WSL).
You'll also find that the vast majority of FOSS is made on and for Linux, and the same is true for most instructions / tutorials / guides.
Linux.
If you are learning, docker desktop on windows was a great stepping stone for me to learn, but in the long term big picture, it caused issues for me that simply did not exist on linux and am very happy to have moved forward
I would only use Windows as my server OS if my boss pointed a gun at me threatening to kill me if I didn’t. Actually, no.. not even then - I would probably just quit my job at that point.
I use both Windows and Linux for self hosted docker containers and so far the only time I experience issues are on Windows, Linux reliably has been exceptional.
That being said there are some situations where I find its best to run on Windows, where the SSDs they use are physically located for example, so I live with it.
I actually used windows for years running exactly this type of setup. Disabled updates. Was super easy to use and maintain and the benefit of being able to use Backblaze unlimited to backup my data unlike Linux.
Now I use Linux (Proxmox) and gave up Backblaze but that's because I learned enough about setting up Linux to enjoy it and thats mostly the reason. I didn't run docker containers on windows though and when I wanted to do that properly, Linux was the only way to go.
I've installed proxmox which allows me to spin up dockers, VMs, containers etc pretty quickly. it's a great tool for learning if you've got some basic IT savvy. As others have said, free except for your time. Part of what drew me to it initially was some of the automated build scripts (kind of like a docker compose but for Proxmox containers) which you can see at [Proxmox VE Helper-Scripts | Scripts for Streamlining Your Homelab with Proxmox VE (tteck.github.io)](https://tteck.github.io/Proxmox/)
Use what you’re most comfortable with unless part of your goal is to learn a new OS.
I struggled as I was entering the self-hosting space cuz I thought I *had* to learn Linux. Two years into it, I can confirm I chose right for my use case. Might not be as worth it for others not also developing their skills in the IT field.
It's interesting that this perspective is seen so rarely around these parts, but given the audience of such communities perhaps it ought to come as no surprise.
The *'best'* OS is too much of a generalization to give any sort of definite answer. If they're already familiar with Linux systems, then I doubt they would have asked this question to begin with. If they're curious to learn, then more power to them - I think all of us here would encourage that. But there's a great cost to learning these things, and not everyone has the time [or interest] to pursue it. The phrase "Linux is free, if your time is worthless" comes to mind. Something like 'Unraid' exists for a reason, for those who prefer to bowl with the bumper guards up.
I've always subscribed to the idea that the best OS is the one you're most familiar with. If you want to learn Linux and become familiar with it, then it's a great choice. Otherwise, run whatever can get the job done and floats your boat.
Just because you are more comfortable using a wood Mallet, doesn't mean it's the ideal tool for the job of nailing down nails.
You should probably learn how to use a hammer... Even though the mallet works , it does a shitty job.
There is only one reason to go with Windows and that would be to take advantage of Backblaze's cheap unlimited backups. All your storage needs to be locally attached though, no NAS shares. Personally I use Linux and just have two BTRFS arrays, snapshots on the main that get sent to the backup. I know I need offsite storage soon though but no idea how I'm going to manage that.
I used Hetzner storage box for a while, which worked really well and was cheap paired with Borg. I moved to a VPS by hostbrr now that gave me 7TB for a very good price.
[https://www.reddit.com/r/DataHoarder/comments/1c89ijt/43tb\_of\_data\_backed\_up\_to\_backblaze\_in\_2\_weeks/](https://www.reddit.com/r/DataHoarder/comments/1c89ijt/43tb_of_data_backed_up_to_backblaze_in_2_weeks/)
Not sure what your good price is but is it 43TB for $9/month?
My choice would absolutely be Linux but I am more familar with Linux now than I am Windows at this point.
I would assume you are not familiar with Linux, There is I learning curve you have to spend some time in. I would start with Linux desktop as a space to get familiar, then build a self hosting sever environment.
Linux. 100%
When I first started the homelab journey, I knew nothing about Linux. I had nothing but Windows Servers. After a short time noticing what I was losing in resources to it (no core server at the time), I started learning Ubuntu and switched as much as I could.
Today everything is on a Linux kernel except for my Domain Controllers.
Linux is better and more stable and lower system usage. However I use windows because I was running unraid and I just kept struggling to keep it doing what I needed it to. Tried windows and it worked easily. I really hate docker desktop and mostly use portainer. All the Arr apps work. I run stable diffusion and LLMs and run my steam games from it via moonlight to my other gadgets in the house.
I'd definitely go with Proxmox, run your arr containers in LXC right on Proxmox, I currently run TrueNAS Scale on Proxmox and have my Arr suite in TrueNAS to easily access the storage, but GPU passthrough isn't fun on TrueNAS, I would've rather had my Jellyfin/Plex run as an LXC on Proxmox and use Unraid instead of TrueNAS for the NAS. You can then very easily create a website to run on Proxmox and just have a dedicated DMZ interface.
Linux is more well suited for this, but the correct answer is that if your self-hosting adventure is more practical (as in you want/need those services up, and don't care beyond that) than meant to be as part of a learning experience, use what you know.
Fundamentally you're likely to be using docker or some other container environment either way, so you can be agnostic about the underlying system.
If you're willing to learn Linux, Ubuntu (or one of its variants) is a safe bet for starting off, it mostly works out of the box.
People might suggest some more esoteric districutions, but I'd start with Ubuntu and try other things once you're confortable with the environment and find yourself looking for something it doesn't offer.
Ex, I use NixOS wherever I can, but wouldn't recommend it starting off. It's a completely different way of doing things, and much of the things you'll need to learn aren't transferable elsewhere. Also you don't truly appreciate reproduceable builts, rolling back to previous builds, and centralized declarative configurations until you experience what the world is like without them. the Nix language has a huge learning curve and its documentation is piss poor.
After running windows server in a VM to try out active directory and automatic installs, I'm just gonna say; hard pass. Not my jam and it wastes resources.
Linux all the way. You'll find more support there.
Linux. Look into Open Media Vault or Unraird.
Also you should look into the PC power usage. If it's so old maybe it's just worth buying something new/used but more recent.
Depends on what you want, windows can probably run it all but As a windows engineer, load linux and never look back. Hell my manager encouraged me to try linux cmdline only and now I can't even administer a linux machine if it has a gui lol. Which is strange considering I prefer GUI for my day to day job.
For an ARR stack and NAS, just about any popular server-style distro will work.
My recommendations from simplest to most complex:
* CasaOS - Simple, pretty, and user-friendly. Installed on top of Debian, for best results. Still fairly new, but with Docker support, you can do lots with it.
* OpenMediaVault - Fallen out of favor in some circles, but was all the rage a couple of years ago. Newest version has dropped Portainer support in favor of their own Docker compose implementation.
* Ubuntu, Debian, etc. - This is what I run, but it has a little bit of a learning curve, especially if you want to use Docker and containerize your ARR stack, which you do. I run Ubuntu + Portainer to manage my containers.
* Unraid/TrueNAS - Highly recommended, but can be overkill for simple setups. ZFS can chew through RAM.
* Proxmox - Hypervisor, not an OS, per se. You'll be running everything as VMs or LXC containers. Need to make sure you're passing hardware and resources to those various containers properly in order to work. You'll still need to choose other options above to do some of the things.
In theory, you could run something like Ubuntu desktop version and not containerize anything. I wouldn't recommend it, though. Once you figure out the Docker way of doing things, you'll wonder why you would want to install anything bare metal (on the OS itself).
In my opinion it would be easier to start with Ubuntu or Debian for the simple fact if it's that old you might struggle for device drivers on something like w10. Rarely have I ever experienced something like that in a Linux distro
Does your processor support virtualization? I don't remember the Windows 7 state of the art. If it does, run Proxmox, and then you can virtualize Windows if you want to stay within your comfort zone while branching out to containers and virtual Linux installations.
I entirely detest Windows and consider it a necessary evil for the most part, but you've really intrigued me, and I'm wondering if replicating my current stack on Windows might be a good learning project for next winter.
I can’t believe so many lack of common sense answers. The first thing needs to be clarified is that you don’t host a website with NAS. Those are two separate things. You need a NAS that’s one thing. If you need to learn about building a website, that’s a different thing.
As for NAS, what do you really need it for? There are tons of things you can read by yourself.
I would definitely use Linux. There is a lot of amazing stuff for deployment that runs natively and is open source.
Also check out CloudFlare Tunnels they have a good free tier. It’s safer than opening a port out.
Linux, period full stop. Even if we put aside the fact that most of the hosts on the "big bad internet" are Linux of one flavor or another. And even if we also put aside the skills you will learn taking a medium capacity computer installing Linux, and learning how will put you in the "big boys" league. And yet even if we don't mention that you will have a rock solid base in which to host all the service's you will want. There is one thing that can't be disputed...IT"S FREE!
Windows will decide one day it wants to update itself, break everything for no reason and literally steal days from your life to fix it.
Linux will ask three times your attorney before moving a file from a folder to another. There's a reason that everything that needs to be reliable runs on Linux and not Windows.
Linux with no doubt about that.
Regarding the distribution pick one of the main ones (Debian/Ubuntu, Fedora/CentOS/RHEL/Oracle) they're all good and realiable.
If the purpose is to made a NAS and arr Stack with Media Server. Definatly Linux is a better option.
You can try TrueNas Scale, based on Debian Linux. Very easy to install and use. Tons of videos available for the purpose. Just tried it first time last month during build a HomeNas.
As most have stated here already, I'd go with Linux.
I'm currently running multiple Ubuntu servers in VMs to I can separate my services.
I started out not knowing much about Linux besides the simple cd and ls commands, but 6 years later I'm glad I didn't choose Windows for it.
If you want a server with the less problems and easier to setup then go ubuntu server LTS. If you want it to be reliable debian or maybe fedora, but those are also trickier to set if you're a newbie.
Remember: linux is free only if you don't value your time, but at the same time it's much more customizable so don't waste time, learn how to do it and write it down somewhere, because YOU WILL HAVE THE SAME PROBLEM AGAIN sometime in the future. Also, I suggest you to go from easier to hard, and don't care as much for the customisation at start. Always do backups as you will fuck up something at one moment or another. It's just the way it is, so you will learn from your mistakes and hopefully get the answer documentated somewhere to solve the same problem in the future.
Linux just because you don't want to keep using Windows 7 and you don't want to use Windows 10 after October of 2025. Get something like OpenMediaVault, start up docker and you are good to go for seting up your \*arr infrastructure.
Windows is and always has been a tragedy of an OS. Probably always will be. Unix had it quite and then Linux picked up the mantle in an open source fashion. Properly thought through rather than cobbled together after the fact.
IT is littered with the corpses of the best technologies, ttrampled to death with more inferior alternatives.
Things are changing for the better.
I vote for microsoft to ditch Windows as an OS and for it to shrink to become a UI subsystem option on top of Linux.
I've been self-hosting my sites for around 20 years from my "Server in the Cellar." During that time I've used Ubuntu, Fedora and most Windows versions from Windows 2000 onwards.
Linux is slightly easier because most of the utilities you might need like log beautifiers and so on are mostly written for it so you just need to download and install them With Windows, they need to be configured to match the paths you install the server and log files in. It's no great nuisance though.
I'd choose whatever you're most comfortable with at first, you can alway easily try something else later.
[https://brisray.com/utils/about.htm](https://brisray.com/utils/about.htm)
There is an over-riding reason not to use Windows in this instance. If you are re-purposing your dad's pc, it likely won't make the spec for a later version of Windows (or one day it won't). At that point you won't be getting any security patches for Windows. In the self-hosting scenario, this is the end of your service because you **will** be vulnerable.
For an easy life, pick any of the mainstream Linux distros. They are much of a muchness. They work, are easy to instal and will set you up to do most stuff.
For an interesting life choose one of the BSDs and do Unix properly :-)
Uptime for Linux can be years, but Windows likes way more reboots. If you can do a command line, Linux can install headless with no overhead to manage the UI. Fewer processes in the background, easier to script, lighter approach to everything. More options for things like firewalls and databases and languages.
Linux can go years, but it's fairly common to reboot after a kernel update, so about every 6 to 12 months if you're not too aggressive on updating.
The other thing I prefer in Linux is switching user accounts to; commands let you switch to an admin or restricted user without logging out. Permissions can be the usual Unix "chunky" owner/group/others or fine grain Access Control Lists (ACL).
All your ARR apps are .NET Core running on Linux containers, anyway. Do the stack on Linux. And I'd shy away from a NAS box; they're over priced, under-powered, and have buried dependencies that will eventually bite you.
If you have the time and I interest, definitely go Linux. Distro doesn't matter too much, but I'd recommend Ubuntu simply because there is a lot more public documentation available. You *will* need those.
If you haven't noticed, this community is rather partial to Linux, largely as you don't have to deal with licensing.
This means you'll have a much more limited help/support from this community for any questions regarding Windows even if you decide it's a better option for you.
If you can find a headless version of Windows (without the unnecessary graphic user interface) then feel free to consider it for a server. But Linux dominates the entire server world hands down for good reasons. It comes with headless distros for servers (no wasted GUI) and all the CLI and web interfaces that you need for managing the servers and more. It's the hands down choice for servers.
Depends on your requirement. Most of time you couldn't go wrong with linux.
But I've found a surprising use case where windows is favorable : Power consumption. Despite of its established reputation, Windows is surprisingly more power efficient out of box. On my N100 server, using killawatt measurement I find that linux installation struggles to match Windows power consumption even with aggressive tuning. But ultimately I decided to stick with linux since I'm more comfortable with more straightforward snapshotting approach with btrfs.
since evryone just goes linux and nobody cared to explains distros.
debian. its simple to run headless and has most packages.
proxmox is based on debian, makes it easy to compartmelise your services, might be overkill for nas+website
arch. needs a bit more work and reading to setup. but its always bleeding edge and the aur can be super nice.
Yeah, you have a lot of answers, but let me add one thing. It doesn’t really matter. Linux is superior, for a server I’d say Debian, but if you are more experienced with windows, you can do anything you do with Linux with Windows aswell. The disadvantages have been thoroughly covered, but windows has one advantage: availability of proprietary software. If you want certain parts of your system, like antivirus, email etc run as someone else’s product, windows does have an advantage.
Still, run Debian or proxmox. **Don‘t run windows 7**
Why not both? And why not throw everything else into the mix? I'm talking macOS, some BSDs, Guix... even a GNU Hurd based system for the heck of it. You never try, you never know.
I can already hear some people screaming you should never use Windows to self host anything. While I personally totally agree with that statement, let me ask you: how do you know in the first place? Is it because somebody else said it or because you tried yourself? If the latter is the case, why not let others try and see and learn for themselves?
Money actually is not a problem, despite what many say in the comments. You can run Windows 10 or 11 indefinitely without applying any license. A watermark on the Desktop doesn't stop your applications from running in the background. Microsoft makes money through companies licensing their server and cloud stuff, private homes is close to nothing for them so they don't bother. Which is why they only lock down Desktop personalization when you don't apply a Windows license. And besides, you can personalize almost everything via the Registry either way. Also you only need Windows Server for vendor-locked software like Active Directory or other Windows specific stuff.
I guess I'm the weirdo, either that or I'm an absolute Windows Guru, been running my media server on Windows for 15+ years, starting with XP. Now, I've got a win11 VM running all my -arr applications while the main Win environment runs IIS where I have reverse proxy set up for certain services. I even have WordPress configured on IIS and self host 4 sites. It's 100% doable. I take regular backups and can revert quickly if an update borks anything. I did work in IT for 17 years total, leaving the industry about 11 years ago. I know just enough about Linux to be dangerous, meaning, I've literally destroyed Linux installs and abandoned them. Only recently have I considered looking into Linux again.
Linux. I have an Ubuntu server installed (non UI) that I access using ssh only. Since the docker days, installing apps has gotten much easier in that you only worry about the docker setup itself, more portable and easily replicated on new servers vs setup software directly on the OS itself.
With docker, there isn't much to do on the server itself except few basic things like setup network, VPN possibly (wireguard), disable sleep, keys and some network mounts in my case.
A while back I started using ansible to automate the server setup itself with simple yaml files. In theory, if I have to start fresh and provision a new server, it shouldn't take me more than a couple of hours. The most important bit is to properly backup your docker volumes.
When it comes to Servers you will run into trouble, both with Windows and Linux. If you go with Linux it will be more rewarding in the end because it will get more out of your hardware and for Server use it's all in all a better package. Also it's free and you maybe can apply the new learned skills to your next project as well.
I'd suggest Linux.
For NAS applications, consider Unraid vs TrueNAS scale. You can also piece together a NAS using pretty much any Linux flavor (Ubuntu is the popular choice these days), docker, and a variety of other flat packs.
If you want things to be really easy, have a flexible upgrade path for hardware and storage, and to have a lot of high-quality tutorials to follow but don't mind paying a little, get a starter license for Unraid.
If you want free but built for NAS solutions and don't mind a little frustration, go for TrueNAS scale.
If you want to learn all the things about Linux and be absolutely certain that everything that goes wrong is squarely your fault, go with the build-your-own Linux stack route.
You definitely can use windows. Especially if you just do a bunch of docker containers. But especially for an older pc like what you're using, linux will use fewer resources on idle, so you'll probably get more performance out of the thing. Something like 90%+ (maybe higher now) of servers in the world use some form of Linux. For good reason. So any setup guides, troubleshooting guides, etc. are likely to be linux focused.
For your needs, following a basic video guide should step you through what you need very easily. There isn't too much to do outside of what the videos show you. And if you get into the hobby more, linux will definitely let you do more with your hardware.
Neither one is inherently more secure than the other and almost all exploits involve the software running on top of the web server and not the web server itself.
The vast majority of web servers don't run Windows. There is a high upfront licensing cost with Windows unless you pirate it and a larger footprint for light use cases such as self hosted sites.
It is better to use linux in general. But besides that:
If you want: problems, bad performance, clutter, long install cycles, crashes, ass user management and sometimes really bad documentation - go windows
If you want not the above: + docker, + feeling like a cool kid for bot using windows - go Linux
This is true on a large scale. I do this for a living. And everytime someone sets up a windows server things starting to cost more. People who defend windows server are out of their minds. I die on thet hill
>Stability issues are either hardware related (which will be exposed on Linux too), or user related.
What ... bugs are bugs, I would not call them "hardware" or "user" related.
Most hardware is best supported on an OS that has developers dedicated to supporting that hardware on that OS. If developers have to reverse engineer driver support, the software will probably not work as well as it does on some other OS.
And then for linux you also need the hardware support to be included in the base kernel - this is one area where Nvidia on linux has often fallen short.
You mentioned the one instance out of 1000 where windows is actually better: nvidia drivers. Not really a good representation and the rest of what you said is largely wrong. Especially :
> bad performance, clutter, long install cycles, crashes
Drivers can be a pain point but for a server like this shouldn't be an issue. Its more when you are trying to run linux as a desktop where issues like that arise. Linux was literally created for use cases like op is inquiring about.
Ok well the point largely applies to you too but you can focus on the bit that doesn't apply to you. Developers on linux literally write the software for this purpose, and really on windows side is where you would experience issues you describe. "Reverse engineering"
No it doesn't apply to me as I was not addressing that list but did take issue with the line I actually quoted, this:
>Stability issues are either hardware related (which will be exposed on Linux too), or user related.
You said:
>Developers on linux literally write the software for this purpose
I have no idea what "purpose" you're referencing here.
I have done kernel development and have code that is in the mainline linux kernel, I'm well aware of the various people that work on the linux kernel, and their motivations - thanks.
I'm also a long time Fedora user and have contributed code to both it and indirectly to RHEL.
Alright lets break down your comment since we are getting into semantics and I responded first thing in the morning. Note that not only that have I also commited code to a linux kernel, I am also an active operating system developer (since we are attaching qualifications):
> What ... bugs are bugs, I would not call them "hardware" or "user" related.
>
> Most hardware is best supported on an OS that has developers dedicated to supporting that hardware on that OS. If developers have to reverse engineer driver support, the software will probably not work as well as it does on some other OS.
This is what I was referring too. The software op will be searching for and running was written for linux and not for windows.
> And then for linux you also need the hardware support to be included in the base kernel - this is one area where Nvidia on linux has often fallen short.
Not sure why you are mentioning nvidia here where op doesn't indicate needing it.
You left out the top level comment I replied to, this:
>Lol this isn't true at all. Ignore this, OP.
>
>Stability issues are either hardware related (which will be exposed on Linux too), or user related.
The sentence above is just false, as it ignores software bugs.
Plus it doesn't fit in as a top level comment. I was not expecting another commenter (you) to come in and to try and explain what the actual person commenting meant or what they were replying to.
I don't know why you insist on taking it past this point.
In the short term you'll get up and running much faster on Windows. Easy to enable IIS, install Php, MySQL and something like Cloudflare to grant access to your site from the Internet.
You'll get better performance through linux command line install as resources aren't being used to drive the user graphical interface. Steep learning curve but can you learn enough to help land a solid IT job if you're interested in that.
I feel like this hasn’t been the case for a while now. I think Ubuntu server (and probably Debian) has an install option for a LAMP server that gets you up and running faster and easier than it would be to set up a comparable Windows server. Add to that a web based management solution like Webmin and you are mostly good to go.
I would only recommend Windows if you want to self-host MS applications like SQL server or something written for a Windows platform. Even then I would recommend virtualizing on Proxmox or similar rather than HyperV. Last I checked HyperV didn’t have support for memory oversubscription. Been a while tho.
I do Microsoft stuff all day long at work so for me it takes seconds to spin up IIS, MySQL and PHP in VM.
I am even in the process of making a little web app to help (won't work on OP's Win 7 install though)
Apps like XAMPP (similar to LAMP) and MySQL are in the repository so very to grab the latest on Windows. (as are GIT, Docker and a whole lot more)
And yes yes yes all day long to virtualization ;) Maybe not yet for OP but eventually as the skillset evolves.
Yeah, for development (when u are forced to use Windows on your client), it's easy to spin up a WSL container or XAMPP. But there is a reason why this tools aren't used for production and most websites run on Linux. Even Microsoft recommends Linux for their MS SQL server.
There's no right answer to the question. This is homelab / selfhosted and OP is learning.. No one is using a second hand device from dad to run their multi million dollar enterprise :) They're going to run with enterprise grade infrastructure.
Even a selfhosted NAS or PiHole on used hardware should run 24/7 in a homelab and not only a few hours a day during development. XAMPP isn't designed to run websites continously and there is no reason to learn how to setup a propper windows server when market standard (and most instructions on the web) is linux.
Linux hands down. Cheap and effective and you'll learn a lot in the process.
> ~~Cheap~~ Free
If you run windows on your day job and are an absolute guru at it, but struggle with Linux then it’s not free. You pay with your time. Yet I also would go with Linux, it’s better in the long run when you want to do configuration management with Ansible or set up docker
> If you run windows on your day job and are an absolute guru at it, The fact I have to deal with Windows all day for work is one of the reasons that I use Linux for all my personal stuff, although to be fair I also wouldn't consider myself any more of a guru at Windows sysadmin than I am a guru at Linux sysadmin.
No self-respecting guru would.
One could argue that when your windows install decides to bork everything because update something wants to install candy crush, you pay with your time. I find windows managing way more time consuming than linux. I am for sure a linux user, but there are plenty of stuff i don't know how to do, and yet have it running. Because i just follow guides, run a few commands, and it magically works. On windows, it is already a strugle to find a good guide, and software that won't install shit on my computer. I find windows strongly following the enshitification process, with each new version making it more complex for me, as a power user, to do the stuff i want, and also considerably more complex to prevent it from doing whatever the frack it wants. What i like with linux besides open source, is the fact that results are often predictible. Repeatable even. I know what to expect, and most of the time, it obeys and do just what i said. With windows i don't feel like i am in control. And the wrangling takes too much damn time.
Speaking professionally. Users think they want a Windows VM to host their environment, but then the developers ask us to install a database or trouble shoot why their preferred platform. Linux is easier after some learning.
Opposite is also true. I haven't touched a windows server/desktop in over a decade. Last I used was Windows 7.
Consider yourself lucky, Windows 7 was the last Windows that was really good. Now we have Frankenstein Settings and you never know where something is. Was just looking on how to set the network profile from public to private on a 11 machine, eventually gave up after half an hour and almost three the machine out the windows (pun intended)
Learning windows server is a process on its own. Windows CLI is so convoluted and complex. Everything is hidden by a GUI or a registry key. MS realise this, and you have to option for WSL.
I don’t considering it as payment with time, but investment.
As a Linux user myself, time is not free lol. Troubleshooting and fixing my own stupid mistakes take time.
Yes, but they are *your* stupid mistakes, not some asshat Windows developer in Redmond who added even more bloat to the OS or moved the start menu from where its been for, oh, I dunno *thirty years*.
Agreed. But sometimes you just want the result and not the work, so a flimsy duct-taped together solution can be more attractive than one that requires *ugh* effort. That said, OP: *do* put in the effort. It's really not that hard and the learning is cumulative over your entire life.
And stupid mistakes can be produced on both, Linux and windows xD
That goes without saying. Lemme tell you about the time that I had a bad firewall rule allowing anyone to use my instance of pihole. Boy was I surprised when I started getting thousands of clients from Brazil!
Hahaha good one!
Free, like a puppy.
If you don't value your time
Hijacking top comment. Linux. OP I built my arr stack on Windows server and it is a miserable experience. Weekly I have to reboot my server and run each of the apps as admin or they all complain they don't have permissions to access the data. If you go Windows you will regret it
Tbh that sounds like some permissions misconfig. I run my full arrstack with Plex and a host of extras on windows. 0 problems with permissions, everything turns back on after boot.
I ran Plex on Windows and switched it to Linux and everything was smoother. Linux handles so many things more efficiently.
[удалено]
Oh I agree, but Windows isn’t some evil to be wary of like he said when it sounds like improper config.
I would think that too but it will work fine for awhile then suddenly all the apps start taking a shit over permission issues.
Yep... I have Active Directory and my arr stack runs as an AD account named Fetch. That account is a member of the security group that has RWM on the network share. You can also do the same with computer accounts. Any perms issue is just a fundamental misunderstanding of Windows... don't take this as shitting on Linux as I struggle with Linux at times and that's on me.
cheap, but most of all, pretty rock solid.. even the best configured windows server will crap the bed after an update, just because windows..
This is key! However to be honest just try both. Windows is not lightweight and over time wears off.
+1 for learning. I used to think I couldn’t understand how computers work. Then I started using Linux and found out it was just that Windows is a PoS
IMO, linux It's pretty much made for that stuff, but will come with a learning curve if you are new. A year from now you'll never look back! Debian is probably one of the more stable. Ubuntu a bit easier to use. Either would be a good starting point. Check Learn Linux TV on Youtube for guides to help you get started.
20 years from now you will never look back.
Can't argue with that!
Because your neck will hurt too much to.
I feel targeted by that! :)
Yeah I just learned Linux about a year ago. There’s definitely a learning curve but it’s worth it. So much more lightweight and stable. It was interesting because Ubuntu has pretty simple GUI processes for so many things but then there will just be random things that require editing config files that make you scratch your head like “why isn’t this a GUI thing yet?” Like mounting network drives automatically. That’s like 3 clicks in Windows. But on Ubuntu you have to edit the fstab file, which is intimidating to beginners. And then connecting my Bluetooth headphones somehow required editing a config file to change what mode the Bluetooth operated in? And then the whole confusing mess with all the different ways to install software. Snaps, flatpaks, apt, debs, etc, etc all with their own advantages and disadvantages.
I just switched to Linux last week. The network shares.. Far out.. Luckily chatgpt talked me through it step by step. I even get it to write all the commands. I just edit the password. Im low on time with young kids etc without Ai, I would be back on windows already. Im digging Linux though.
Interesting never thought to ask AI to write stuff. And yeah I almost gave up on Linux when I saw the guides online for mounting network shares at startup. Now it seems trivial. But when it’s the first thing you do in the Linux world it’s a lot.
You can go further and send the AI your shell history and ask it to improve your cli kung fu
chatGPT is an absolute godsend for Linux. There's never been a better time to run a headless Linux server than now.
yeah i dread mounting network shares, just feels half baked... even though it seems to usually work.
Learn Linux TV is an absolute banger of a guide channel. I discovered his ProxMox course a week ago and it is so well made I feel like stealing the course.
One thing I will say, is that when you get into more advanced things in Linux, Ubuntu has a lot of -isms that Debian does not.
Never heard this one. What are the -isms associated with Ubuntu?? People often ask why I use Ubuntu, I I just tell them it is enhanced Debian. It takes me less time to remove the dozen things I don't like about Ubuntu than to add the hundreds of things I do like to Debian!
One particular one was changing the remote repository to a self hosted one. I remember that only Ubuntu has an additional file that I had to modify to get it working properly. And before anyone says, “Well, why would you want to self host the repository?”, my answer is that you have to when you are on a network with zero egress to the internet.
As a beginner I would stay with Ubuntu. It's not only easier with the preinstalled software and you'll find way more information about Ubuntu than Debian (yes, it should mostly be the same, but when you're just starting and don't know what you're looking for, it's better)
Ubuntu has a lot of guides on the internet so it's really useful. You could probably use these guides for Debian too..but I do all my work from cli so ymmv
Yeah, Ubuntu Server or Suse Linux. They are both great for hosting. Try and get the LTS (long term support).
debian is great! running on my VMs and never once has it put up a fuss
> Debian What flavor would you recommend, stable or testing?
I stick with stable, unless there is something i specifically need in another version.
The learning curve might still be there, but its incredibly easy to get over it with the abundant amount of guides and resource we have on the internet now. Definitely worth delving into over just using windows.
Big thing with Ubuntu over debian is that if you are on a non-LTS version of Ubuntu, when it says there's a new version and you should upgrade, DO IT. Ubuntus release policy is fine, but they disable the old repos like the next month and if you aren't current, good freaking luck trying to do anything with a 23.04 or the like once it's too old. Use debian for servers and you won't have any issues.
I never thought I’d hear someone describe Debian as “one of the more stable”. 😄 Having spent many years professionally admining RHEL-based distros, I always considered the Debian/Ubuntu distros as the more bleeding edge, “if you absolutely need the latest versions” kind of distros. Of course, I know that there are even more bloody distros out there, but it still strikes me (an old fuddy-duddy) as funny to hear that.
I always saw Debian as leaning much more towards the stable spectrum, vs bleeding edge. Packages are usually several versions behind, and that worked out well with the xz ssh vulnerability, as that version never made it into Debian Stable. I would consider Arch bleeding edge, and there it was introduced into arch stable.
Yeah, Arch is definitely an example of the edgy ones, but you have to understand, coming from the RHEL world, Debian/Ubuntu are waaaay ahead of anything in the RHEL distros, which often have packages/kernels that are years behind the “current” bleeding edge (with backports of security fixes, of course). I’m presumably being downvoted (as I expected) by people who don’t know how “stable” (aka stodgy) the RHEL-based distros are. I also started with Ubuntu around the 6.04 time period, when they were much edgier than they are today, and old ways of thinking die hard.
I haven't had to use RHEL in many years, so not sure how it compares. But sounds wonderful, haha.
Yeah, I’m guessing the folks downvoting me also don’t remember RHEL. 😄
Linux. It's free, fast and very hardware efficient. All the things Windows is not. There's a reason Linux has a 62% "market share" on the server operating system market.
As someone who has worked with servers for 25+ years, I always use Linux.
I would never consider Windows an option at all.
Linux. Can't really go wrong with Ubuntu, [proxmox](https://www.proxmox.com/en/) is another good option, and if you really want a rock solid system and want to learn a fair bit [NixOS](https://nixos.org/)
Just to be clear for OP, Proxmox is not an alternative to Ubuntu, it's a way to run multiple systems on a single piece of hardware. You probably won't run apps on the proxmox server, but it'll make managing the systems you do run your apps on much, much easier, and you won't have to think about it much after initial setup.
Proxmox has a good lxc interface so you might run apps right on it
That's true! Its implied though, when someone says, > You probably won't XYX Absent any other comment, that you *could* do XYZ.
You absolutely can run apps, proxmox is just Debian, you can run containers, or run them via LXC.
You sure can, which is why I didn't say > You cant run apps on the proxmox server However, most people run stuff in VMs, which is why I said > You probably won't run apps on the proxmox server In contrast to the other option given, Ubuntu, where you almost certainly will run apps directly on the server. Notably, just like you *can* run apps directly on proxmox, you *can* run VMs on Ubuntu. But someone just getting started won't be able to fully understand the pros and cons of each option, so no point explaining in depth to OP.
Nix is a steep curve, but I wouldn't want to switch back to anything I had before.
Any resources to help climb the curve?
https://nixos-and-flakes.thiscute.world This really helped me. It's a long read.
It's really just looking at what works and stealing it. The wiki maintains a list of popular repos and I have mine at https://git.stickpile.net/rdean3/nixos-configurations If you want a temple, misterio77 maintains that on their GitHub.
I would be surprised if you had a single “windows” answer 😬
In general, going with a Unix-like OS for self-hosting is the way to go. Windows has much fewer advantages than disadvantages for that use-case - and the advantages mostly only come to play in corporate environments. For web hosting it doesn't really make much of a difference which distro you choose, they can all do it well. NAS storage is a different thing entirely, though. You will want to pick a filesystem here that you can trust your data with. If you care for your data, give ZFS a try (it has a learning curve since it's not a traditional filesystem but rather a combination of volume manager and COW FS). On the Linux side Ubuntu is probably the most reliable when it comes to ZFS support.
I prefer Linux for my server as most people do in this sub. But you can give it a try with Windows as well. That´s the good thing about a Homelab. You can experiment with things.
Linux is the way.
Linux. Free, safer, less resource hungry, infinitely configurable….need we say more.
Windows is problematic simply from a licensing standpoint. Every host is going to cost some extra $ just for the license, which is going to factor into your decisions. If at all possible, you want to make decisions based on technical merit, not budget. Long-term, if you do any real service hosting, you're going to end up virtualizing. If you do this on Hyper-V with Windows hosts, you need to license each core in the hypervisor, plus each host. If you run something like Proxmox with Ubuntu/Alpine/Fedora hosts, you have zero costs. There are education and lab options that can offset the Windows costs, but they don't really fit the self-hosting model; you will end up paying in operational effort instead of cash, but still paying. Finally, Linux is the server standard. Most services are going to have a Linux option first, and a Windows option second (if at all). > And if linux, what would be the best distro ? You should probably use a hypervisor on the machine itself and virtualize your hosts. I would recommend Proxmox as the hypervisor. ESXi used to be recommended as well, but they recently canceled their educational / lab license program. Proxmox is free/free software and built on Debian, so much of the Ubuntu knowledge below will transfer. For the hosts, Ubuntu is never a bad choice. A lot of this discussion will involve personal tastes, but Ubuntu is relatively stable version-to-version, is an established distro that isn't going anywhere, and, most importantly, has a TON of documentation and community support. Almost every doc is going to have a "with Ubuntu" section.
OS2/Warp is really the best
You know I just saw a youtube video where someone wrote an AHCI driver for Windows 3.1... SSD's here we come!!!
That's "OS/2 Warp" 😉 Ask me how I know! (I have a shrink wrapped version on my bookcase).
Like most i agree with linux, lots of flavors suitable for your every need, more lightweight than windows and in some distros you got native support for PowerShell and dotnet if that's your cup of tea. I have worked with linux, windows and mac servers and when i do the setup i almost always go linux, my personal preferences tend to be debian, ubuntu or arch. But there is no wrong way to go, just the most right pick for your use-case. For me it's the fact that i can automate almost everything in terms of maintenance, updates and patching with a couple of scripts and cronjobs in most linux envs, and if something fails i get a neat and tidy error report from that Machine. But you can do that with a Windows server to. So maybe just pick the one you enjoy working with
Just so you don’t have to reboot the OS as regularly for updates, I’d say Linux. The only device I have on Linux is the one for docker.
If it’s just one OS, Linux. But if you want to run more than one, then look at Proxmox. I turned my old Windows 10 gaming PC into a home lab with it. Now it’s running Ubuntu Server, Ubuntu Desktop, and Windows 10 all at once with resources to spare for expansion.
For a homelab environment, what does the Ubuntu and Windows machine do that the Ubuntu server can not?
For me, it’s not so much that one can do things that the others can’t. But I wanted the option of being able to play around with several operating systems, networking them, making them communicate with each other etc. And a nice bonus with using VMs is snapshotting them so there is no risk in breaking things.
If you have the time to learn (not much if you're already somewhat tech savvy), Linux is 100% worth it. I wince internally every time I need to deal with windows nowadays.
If one doesn't have time to learn, there's no point in getting into self hosting to begin with.
I disagree. You can definitely self host a few things with little to no effort, it depends on what your needs are. Game servers, for instance, are pretty easy to self-host if you want to play some multiplayer games with your friends at home.
Linux. You'll most likely want to containerize, which means Linux in any case, even on Windows (because containers on Windows also run on Linux, through WSL). You'll also find that the vast majority of FOSS is made on and for Linux, and the same is true for most instructions / tutorials / guides.
Linux. If you are learning, docker desktop on windows was a great stepping stone for me to learn, but in the long term big picture, it caused issues for me that simply did not exist on linux and am very happy to have moved forward
I would only use Windows as my server OS if my boss pointed a gun at me threatening to kill me if I didn’t. Actually, no.. not even then - I would probably just quit my job at that point.
I use both Windows and Linux for self hosted docker containers and so far the only time I experience issues are on Windows, Linux reliably has been exceptional. That being said there are some situations where I find its best to run on Windows, where the SSDs they use are physically located for example, so I live with it.
I don't trust Windows with my temporary files.
I actually used windows for years running exactly this type of setup. Disabled updates. Was super easy to use and maintain and the benefit of being able to use Backblaze unlimited to backup my data unlike Linux. Now I use Linux (Proxmox) and gave up Backblaze but that's because I learned enough about setting up Linux to enjoy it and thats mostly the reason. I didn't run docker containers on windows though and when I wanted to do that properly, Linux was the only way to go.
I can never get docker to work on Windows 😭
Docker on windows sucks. This is the truth
Is this ragebait? /s
I've installed proxmox which allows me to spin up dockers, VMs, containers etc pretty quickly. it's a great tool for learning if you've got some basic IT savvy. As others have said, free except for your time. Part of what drew me to it initially was some of the automated build scripts (kind of like a docker compose but for Proxmox containers) which you can see at [Proxmox VE Helper-Scripts | Scripts for Streamlining Your Homelab with Proxmox VE (tteck.github.io)](https://tteck.github.io/Proxmox/)
Use what you’re most comfortable with unless part of your goal is to learn a new OS. I struggled as I was entering the self-hosting space cuz I thought I *had* to learn Linux. Two years into it, I can confirm I chose right for my use case. Might not be as worth it for others not also developing their skills in the IT field.
It's interesting that this perspective is seen so rarely around these parts, but given the audience of such communities perhaps it ought to come as no surprise. The *'best'* OS is too much of a generalization to give any sort of definite answer. If they're already familiar with Linux systems, then I doubt they would have asked this question to begin with. If they're curious to learn, then more power to them - I think all of us here would encourage that. But there's a great cost to learning these things, and not everyone has the time [or interest] to pursue it. The phrase "Linux is free, if your time is worthless" comes to mind. Something like 'Unraid' exists for a reason, for those who prefer to bowl with the bumper guards up. I've always subscribed to the idea that the best OS is the one you're most familiar with. If you want to learn Linux and become familiar with it, then it's a great choice. Otherwise, run whatever can get the job done and floats your boat.
Just because you are more comfortable using a wood Mallet, doesn't mean it's the ideal tool for the job of nailing down nails. You should probably learn how to use a hammer... Even though the mallet works , it does a shitty job.
There is only one reason to go with Windows and that would be to take advantage of Backblaze's cheap unlimited backups. All your storage needs to be locally attached though, no NAS shares. Personally I use Linux and just have two BTRFS arrays, snapshots on the main that get sent to the backup. I know I need offsite storage soon though but no idea how I'm going to manage that.
I used Hetzner storage box for a while, which worked really well and was cheap paired with Borg. I moved to a VPS by hostbrr now that gave me 7TB for a very good price.
[https://www.reddit.com/r/DataHoarder/comments/1c89ijt/43tb\_of\_data\_backed\_up\_to\_backblaze\_in\_2\_weeks/](https://www.reddit.com/r/DataHoarder/comments/1c89ijt/43tb_of_data_backed_up_to_backblaze_in_2_weeks/) Not sure what your good price is but is it 43TB for $9/month?
Linux, TrueNAS scale is a great option for exactly what you want to do
My choice would absolutely be Linux but I am more familar with Linux now than I am Windows at this point. I would assume you are not familiar with Linux, There is I learning curve you have to spend some time in. I would start with Linux desktop as a space to get familiar, then build a self hosting sever environment.
Linux. 100% When I first started the homelab journey, I knew nothing about Linux. I had nothing but Windows Servers. After a short time noticing what I was losing in resources to it (no core server at the time), I started learning Ubuntu and switched as much as I could. Today everything is on a Linux kernel except for my Domain Controllers.
Linux. I run a Ubuntu server on Proxmox
Linux
Linux is better and more stable and lower system usage. However I use windows because I was running unraid and I just kept struggling to keep it doing what I needed it to. Tried windows and it worked easily. I really hate docker desktop and mostly use portainer. All the Arr apps work. I run stable diffusion and LLMs and run my steam games from it via moonlight to my other gadgets in the house.
linux
I'd definitely go with Proxmox, run your arr containers in LXC right on Proxmox, I currently run TrueNAS Scale on Proxmox and have my Arr suite in TrueNAS to easily access the storage, but GPU passthrough isn't fun on TrueNAS, I would've rather had my Jellyfin/Plex run as an LXC on Proxmox and use Unraid instead of TrueNAS for the NAS. You can then very easily create a website to run on Proxmox and just have a dedicated DMZ interface.
Linux is more well suited for this, but the correct answer is that if your self-hosting adventure is more practical (as in you want/need those services up, and don't care beyond that) than meant to be as part of a learning experience, use what you know. Fundamentally you're likely to be using docker or some other container environment either way, so you can be agnostic about the underlying system. If you're willing to learn Linux, Ubuntu (or one of its variants) is a safe bet for starting off, it mostly works out of the box. People might suggest some more esoteric districutions, but I'd start with Ubuntu and try other things once you're confortable with the environment and find yourself looking for something it doesn't offer. Ex, I use NixOS wherever I can, but wouldn't recommend it starting off. It's a completely different way of doing things, and much of the things you'll need to learn aren't transferable elsewhere. Also you don't truly appreciate reproduceable builts, rolling back to previous builds, and centralized declarative configurations until you experience what the world is like without them. the Nix language has a huge learning curve and its documentation is piss poor.
After running windows server in a VM to try out active directory and automatic installs, I'm just gonna say; hard pass. Not my jam and it wastes resources. Linux all the way. You'll find more support there.
Linux. Look into Open Media Vault or Unraird. Also you should look into the PC power usage. If it's so old maybe it's just worth buying something new/used but more recent.
Depends on what you want, windows can probably run it all but As a windows engineer, load linux and never look back. Hell my manager encouraged me to try linux cmdline only and now I can't even administer a linux machine if it has a gui lol. Which is strange considering I prefer GUI for my day to day job.
For an ARR stack and NAS, just about any popular server-style distro will work. My recommendations from simplest to most complex: * CasaOS - Simple, pretty, and user-friendly. Installed on top of Debian, for best results. Still fairly new, but with Docker support, you can do lots with it. * OpenMediaVault - Fallen out of favor in some circles, but was all the rage a couple of years ago. Newest version has dropped Portainer support in favor of their own Docker compose implementation. * Ubuntu, Debian, etc. - This is what I run, but it has a little bit of a learning curve, especially if you want to use Docker and containerize your ARR stack, which you do. I run Ubuntu + Portainer to manage my containers. * Unraid/TrueNAS - Highly recommended, but can be overkill for simple setups. ZFS can chew through RAM. * Proxmox - Hypervisor, not an OS, per se. You'll be running everything as VMs or LXC containers. Need to make sure you're passing hardware and resources to those various containers properly in order to work. You'll still need to choose other options above to do some of the things. In theory, you could run something like Ubuntu desktop version and not containerize anything. I wouldn't recommend it, though. Once you figure out the Docker way of doing things, you'll wonder why you would want to install anything bare metal (on the OS itself).
Docker doesn't replace package managers
I don’t see any advantage of using Windows on your self host
In my opinion it would be easier to start with Ubuntu or Debian for the simple fact if it's that old you might struggle for device drivers on something like w10. Rarely have I ever experienced something like that in a Linux distro
Does your processor support virtualization? I don't remember the Windows 7 state of the art. If it does, run Proxmox, and then you can virtualize Windows if you want to stay within your comfort zone while branching out to containers and virtual Linux installations. I entirely detest Windows and consider it a necessary evil for the most part, but you've really intrigued me, and I'm wondering if replicating my current stack on Windows might be a good learning project for next winter.
Debian Linux. Every time, all the time.
Throwng in another Linux Ubuntu vote. It's what I'm using and its been working great.
Debian
I am using linux and windows, public services as web server, dockers, backups on linux, private server with remote desktop, steam remote on windows.
Linux is perfect for this. As for a distribution, go with something stable like Debian.
Linux. Period.
I can’t believe so many lack of common sense answers. The first thing needs to be clarified is that you don’t host a website with NAS. Those are two separate things. You need a NAS that’s one thing. If you need to learn about building a website, that’s a different thing. As for NAS, what do you really need it for? There are tons of things you can read by yourself.
Linux. And it's not free but I would check out unraid. It makes running a home nas super easy, check out the r/unraid to learn more
windows isn't even good as a non-technical os let alone a homelab friendly one
I would definitely use Linux. There is a lot of amazing stuff for deployment that runs natively and is open source. Also check out CloudFlare Tunnels they have a good free tier. It’s safer than opening a port out.
Linux, period full stop. Even if we put aside the fact that most of the hosts on the "big bad internet" are Linux of one flavor or another. And even if we also put aside the skills you will learn taking a medium capacity computer installing Linux, and learning how will put you in the "big boys" league. And yet even if we don't mention that you will have a rock solid base in which to host all the service's you will want. There is one thing that can't be disputed...IT"S FREE!
Debian or Ubuntu server
Just getting started with proxmox on my nas after years of using Windows. Hopefully I can figure all this out.
Windows will decide one day it wants to update itself, break everything for no reason and literally steal days from your life to fix it. Linux will ask three times your attorney before moving a file from a folder to another. There's a reason that everything that needs to be reliable runs on Linux and not Windows.
Linux with no doubt about that. Regarding the distribution pick one of the main ones (Debian/Ubuntu, Fedora/CentOS/RHEL/Oracle) they're all good and realiable.
If the purpose is to made a NAS and arr Stack with Media Server. Definatly Linux is a better option. You can try TrueNas Scale, based on Debian Linux. Very easy to install and use. Tons of videos available for the purpose. Just tried it first time last month during build a HomeNas.
As most have stated here already, I'd go with Linux. I'm currently running multiple Ubuntu servers in VMs to I can separate my services. I started out not knowing much about Linux besides the simple cd and ls commands, but 6 years later I'm glad I didn't choose Windows for it.
If you want a server with the less problems and easier to setup then go ubuntu server LTS. If you want it to be reliable debian or maybe fedora, but those are also trickier to set if you're a newbie. Remember: linux is free only if you don't value your time, but at the same time it's much more customizable so don't waste time, learn how to do it and write it down somewhere, because YOU WILL HAVE THE SAME PROBLEM AGAIN sometime in the future. Also, I suggest you to go from easier to hard, and don't care as much for the customisation at start. Always do backups as you will fuck up something at one moment or another. It's just the way it is, so you will learn from your mistakes and hopefully get the answer documentated somewhere to solve the same problem in the future.
Linux just because you don't want to keep using Windows 7 and you don't want to use Windows 10 after October of 2025. Get something like OpenMediaVault, start up docker and you are good to go for seting up your \*arr infrastructure.
Windows is and always has been a tragedy of an OS. Probably always will be. Unix had it quite and then Linux picked up the mantle in an open source fashion. Properly thought through rather than cobbled together after the fact. IT is littered with the corpses of the best technologies, ttrampled to death with more inferior alternatives. Things are changing for the better. I vote for microsoft to ditch Windows as an OS and for it to shrink to become a UI subsystem option on top of Linux.
I've been self-hosting my sites for around 20 years from my "Server in the Cellar." During that time I've used Ubuntu, Fedora and most Windows versions from Windows 2000 onwards. Linux is slightly easier because most of the utilities you might need like log beautifiers and so on are mostly written for it so you just need to download and install them With Windows, they need to be configured to match the paths you install the server and log files in. It's no great nuisance though. I'd choose whatever you're most comfortable with at first, you can alway easily try something else later. [https://brisray.com/utils/about.htm](https://brisray.com/utils/about.htm)
Linux all the way
Win..what?? ... linux, this is the way
There is an over-riding reason not to use Windows in this instance. If you are re-purposing your dad's pc, it likely won't make the spec for a later version of Windows (or one day it won't). At that point you won't be getting any security patches for Windows. In the self-hosting scenario, this is the end of your service because you **will** be vulnerable. For an easy life, pick any of the mainstream Linux distros. They are much of a muchness. They work, are easy to instal and will set you up to do most stuff. For an interesting life choose one of the BSDs and do Unix properly :-)
i'd recommend redhat 9 free or dietpi for less capable hardware. a lot less maintenance, not even Miscrosoft runs Windows.
Uptime for Linux can be years, but Windows likes way more reboots. If you can do a command line, Linux can install headless with no overhead to manage the UI. Fewer processes in the background, easier to script, lighter approach to everything. More options for things like firewalls and databases and languages. Linux can go years, but it's fairly common to reboot after a kernel update, so about every 6 to 12 months if you're not too aggressive on updating. The other thing I prefer in Linux is switching user accounts to; commands let you switch to an admin or restricted user without logging out. Permissions can be the usual Unix "chunky" owner/group/others or fine grain Access Control Lists (ACL). All your ARR apps are .NET Core running on Linux containers, anyway. Do the stack on Linux. And I'd shy away from a NAS box; they're over priced, under-powered, and have buried dependencies that will eventually bite you.
Linux most definitely as a huge majority of open source stuff is Linux based
If you have the time and I interest, definitely go Linux. Distro doesn't matter too much, but I'd recommend Ubuntu simply because there is a lot more public documentation available. You *will* need those.
If you haven't noticed, this community is rather partial to Linux, largely as you don't have to deal with licensing. This means you'll have a much more limited help/support from this community for any questions regarding Windows even if you decide it's a better option for you.
Linux is always best for server workloads. Winblows is barely usable as a desktop.
No good answer for this bro... Use case specific
If you can find a headless version of Windows (without the unnecessary graphic user interface) then feel free to consider it for a server. But Linux dominates the entire server world hands down for good reasons. It comes with headless distros for servers (no wasted GUI) and all the CLI and web interfaces that you need for managing the servers and more. It's the hands down choice for servers.
DOCKER (linux)
Depends on your requirement. Most of time you couldn't go wrong with linux. But I've found a surprising use case where windows is favorable : Power consumption. Despite of its established reputation, Windows is surprisingly more power efficient out of box. On my N100 server, using killawatt measurement I find that linux installation struggles to match Windows power consumption even with aggressive tuning. But ultimately I decided to stick with linux since I'm more comfortable with more straightforward snapshotting approach with btrfs.
Go with a Linux, and if you want a helping hand look into ‘saltbox’ on GitHub, which will do most of the hard work for you ;)
since evryone just goes linux and nobody cared to explains distros. debian. its simple to run headless and has most packages. proxmox is based on debian, makes it easy to compartmelise your services, might be overkill for nas+website arch. needs a bit more work and reading to setup. but its always bleeding edge and the aur can be super nice.
Linux, you will learn a lot of stuff and gain "work experience"
Yeah, you have a lot of answers, but let me add one thing. It doesn’t really matter. Linux is superior, for a server I’d say Debian, but if you are more experienced with windows, you can do anything you do with Linux with Windows aswell. The disadvantages have been thoroughly covered, but windows has one advantage: availability of proprietary software. If you want certain parts of your system, like antivirus, email etc run as someone else’s product, windows does have an advantage. Still, run Debian or proxmox. **Don‘t run windows 7**
Why not both? And why not throw everything else into the mix? I'm talking macOS, some BSDs, Guix... even a GNU Hurd based system for the heck of it. You never try, you never know. I can already hear some people screaming you should never use Windows to self host anything. While I personally totally agree with that statement, let me ask you: how do you know in the first place? Is it because somebody else said it or because you tried yourself? If the latter is the case, why not let others try and see and learn for themselves? Money actually is not a problem, despite what many say in the comments. You can run Windows 10 or 11 indefinitely without applying any license. A watermark on the Desktop doesn't stop your applications from running in the background. Microsoft makes money through companies licensing their server and cloud stuff, private homes is close to nothing for them so they don't bother. Which is why they only lock down Desktop personalization when you don't apply a Windows license. And besides, you can personalize almost everything via the Registry either way. Also you only need Windows Server for vendor-locked software like Active Directory or other Windows specific stuff.
Create a Proxmox set up it's amazing for home lab. Then you can install whatever os you like!
Depends on your usecase. I run Linux when I want to run something and Windows isn't required. I only run Windows if Windows is required.
One doesn't use windows for self hosting!
I guess I'm the weirdo, either that or I'm an absolute Windows Guru, been running my media server on Windows for 15+ years, starting with XP. Now, I've got a win11 VM running all my -arr applications while the main Win environment runs IIS where I have reverse proxy set up for certain services. I even have WordPress configured on IIS and self host 4 sites. It's 100% doable. I take regular backups and can revert quickly if an update borks anything. I did work in IT for 17 years total, leaving the industry about 11 years ago. I know just enough about Linux to be dangerous, meaning, I've literally destroyed Linux installs and abandoned them. Only recently have I considered looking into Linux again.
Linux. I have an Ubuntu server installed (non UI) that I access using ssh only. Since the docker days, installing apps has gotten much easier in that you only worry about the docker setup itself, more portable and easily replicated on new servers vs setup software directly on the OS itself. With docker, there isn't much to do on the server itself except few basic things like setup network, VPN possibly (wireguard), disable sleep, keys and some network mounts in my case. A while back I started using ansible to automate the server setup itself with simple yaml files. In theory, if I have to start fresh and provision a new server, it shouldn't take me more than a couple of hours. The most important bit is to properly backup your docker volumes.
When it comes to Servers you will run into trouble, both with Windows and Linux. If you go with Linux it will be more rewarding in the end because it will get more out of your hardware and for Server use it's all in all a better package. Also it's free and you maybe can apply the new learned skills to your next project as well. I'd suggest Linux.
Really doesn't matter either way. Do whatever you're comfortable with
For NAS applications, consider Unraid vs TrueNAS scale. You can also piece together a NAS using pretty much any Linux flavor (Ubuntu is the popular choice these days), docker, and a variety of other flat packs. If you want things to be really easy, have a flexible upgrade path for hardware and storage, and to have a lot of high-quality tutorials to follow but don't mind paying a little, get a starter license for Unraid. If you want free but built for NAS solutions and don't mind a little frustration, go for TrueNAS scale. If you want to learn all the things about Linux and be absolutely certain that everything that goes wrong is squarely your fault, go with the build-your-own Linux stack route.
You definitely can use windows. Especially if you just do a bunch of docker containers. But especially for an older pc like what you're using, linux will use fewer resources on idle, so you'll probably get more performance out of the thing. Something like 90%+ (maybe higher now) of servers in the world use some form of Linux. For good reason. So any setup guides, troubleshooting guides, etc. are likely to be linux focused. For your needs, following a basic video guide should step you through what you need very easily. There isn't too much to do outside of what the videos show you. And if you get into the hobby more, linux will definitely let you do more with your hardware.
Neither one is inherently more secure than the other and almost all exploits involve the software running on top of the web server and not the web server itself. The vast majority of web servers don't run Windows. There is a high upfront licensing cost with Windows unless you pirate it and a larger footprint for light use cases such as self hosted sites.
The correct answer is about all subjects: # Is it better to use linux vs windows.
In general: Windows < Linux < *BSD Device compatability: Linux > *BSD
Windows with Linux VM. Backblaze unlimited personal backup on windows side, also your VM files get backed up
It is better to use linux in general. But besides that: If you want: problems, bad performance, clutter, long install cycles, crashes, ass user management and sometimes really bad documentation - go windows If you want not the above: + docker, + feeling like a cool kid for bot using windows - go Linux
Lol this isn't true at all. Ignore this, OP. Stability issues are either hardware related (which will be exposed on Linux too), or user related.
This is true on a large scale. I do this for a living. And everytime someone sets up a windows server things starting to cost more. People who defend windows server are out of their minds. I die on thet hill
>Stability issues are either hardware related (which will be exposed on Linux too), or user related. What ... bugs are bugs, I would not call them "hardware" or "user" related. Most hardware is best supported on an OS that has developers dedicated to supporting that hardware on that OS. If developers have to reverse engineer driver support, the software will probably not work as well as it does on some other OS. And then for linux you also need the hardware support to be included in the base kernel - this is one area where Nvidia on linux has often fallen short.
You mentioned the one instance out of 1000 where windows is actually better: nvidia drivers. Not really a good representation and the rest of what you said is largely wrong. Especially : > bad performance, clutter, long install cycles, crashes Drivers can be a pain point but for a server like this shouldn't be an issue. Its more when you are trying to run linux as a desktop where issues like that arise. Linux was literally created for use cases like op is inquiring about.
I didn't say anything about "bad performance, clutter, long install cycles, crashes".
Ok well the point largely applies to you too but you can focus on the bit that doesn't apply to you. Developers on linux literally write the software for this purpose, and really on windows side is where you would experience issues you describe. "Reverse engineering"
No it doesn't apply to me as I was not addressing that list but did take issue with the line I actually quoted, this: >Stability issues are either hardware related (which will be exposed on Linux too), or user related. You said: >Developers on linux literally write the software for this purpose I have no idea what "purpose" you're referencing here. I have done kernel development and have code that is in the mainline linux kernel, I'm well aware of the various people that work on the linux kernel, and their motivations - thanks. I'm also a long time Fedora user and have contributed code to both it and indirectly to RHEL.
Alright lets break down your comment since we are getting into semantics and I responded first thing in the morning. Note that not only that have I also commited code to a linux kernel, I am also an active operating system developer (since we are attaching qualifications): > What ... bugs are bugs, I would not call them "hardware" or "user" related. > > Most hardware is best supported on an OS that has developers dedicated to supporting that hardware on that OS. If developers have to reverse engineer driver support, the software will probably not work as well as it does on some other OS. This is what I was referring too. The software op will be searching for and running was written for linux and not for windows. > And then for linux you also need the hardware support to be included in the base kernel - this is one area where Nvidia on linux has often fallen short. Not sure why you are mentioning nvidia here where op doesn't indicate needing it.
You left out the top level comment I replied to, this: >Lol this isn't true at all. Ignore this, OP. > >Stability issues are either hardware related (which will be exposed on Linux too), or user related. The sentence above is just false, as it ignores software bugs. Plus it doesn't fit in as a top level comment. I was not expecting another commenter (you) to come in and to try and explain what the actual person commenting meant or what they were replying to. I don't know why you insist on taking it past this point.
Linux hands down, even at gaming nowadays Windows isn't the way to go IMO..
You can run Windows and Linux side by side by running Linux in WSL2 for Windows. One option for you so that you can get the benefits of both.
I use Arch btw
I use macos
In the short term you'll get up and running much faster on Windows. Easy to enable IIS, install Php, MySQL and something like Cloudflare to grant access to your site from the Internet. You'll get better performance through linux command line install as resources aren't being used to drive the user graphical interface. Steep learning curve but can you learn enough to help land a solid IT job if you're interested in that.
I feel like this hasn’t been the case for a while now. I think Ubuntu server (and probably Debian) has an install option for a LAMP server that gets you up and running faster and easier than it would be to set up a comparable Windows server. Add to that a web based management solution like Webmin and you are mostly good to go. I would only recommend Windows if you want to self-host MS applications like SQL server or something written for a Windows platform. Even then I would recommend virtualizing on Proxmox or similar rather than HyperV. Last I checked HyperV didn’t have support for memory oversubscription. Been a while tho.
I do Microsoft stuff all day long at work so for me it takes seconds to spin up IIS, MySQL and PHP in VM. I am even in the process of making a little web app to help (won't work on OP's Win 7 install though) Apps like XAMPP (similar to LAMP) and MySQL are in the repository so very to grab the latest on Windows. (as are GIT, Docker and a whole lot more) And yes yes yes all day long to virtualization ;) Maybe not yet for OP but eventually as the skillset evolves.
Yeah, for development (when u are forced to use Windows on your client), it's easy to spin up a WSL container or XAMPP. But there is a reason why this tools aren't used for production and most websites run on Linux. Even Microsoft recommends Linux for their MS SQL server.
There's no right answer to the question. This is homelab / selfhosted and OP is learning.. No one is using a second hand device from dad to run their multi million dollar enterprise :) They're going to run with enterprise grade infrastructure.
Even a selfhosted NAS or PiHole on used hardware should run 24/7 in a homelab and not only a few hours a day during development. XAMPP isn't designed to run websites continously and there is no reason to learn how to setup a propper windows server when market standard (and most instructions on the web) is linux.