Linux for serious web applications?
-
I completly disagree with that theory. I have been a windows admin/programmer for 15 years (yes I used MS Windows 2) and 2 years with linux. In my opinion linux is soo much less work to install and to support than windows once you spend the time to learn the system. And time needed to learn the system is no longer than the time needed to learn windows. Also when something breaks, the free support for linux is soo much better than any thing I have seen with windows. I would compare the site forums.gentoo.org[^] with this site. As good as this site is for programmers that site is good for supporting the operating system and the thousands of applications/packages it has. In my opinion there is no such thing (one site that supports all applications) with windows. John
John M. Drescher wrote: I completly disagree with that theory. I suggest you go back and read what was said. You have just implied that you believe the cost of the system to be more of a factor than that costs of the people supporting the system. AND THAT I DISAGREE WITH! I do not mind getting old. It beats all the other options that I can think of.
-
John M. Drescher wrote: I completly disagree with that theory. I suggest you go back and read what was said. You have just implied that you believe the cost of the system to be more of a factor than that costs of the people supporting the system. AND THAT I DISAGREE WITH! I do not mind getting old. It beats all the other options that I can think of.
-
I know I do not keep up with other platforms than MS as I should. Lately, I have been curious of cost comparisons with Linux and MS Windows for commerical web application development. Does anyone know a ballpark licensing costs Linux to build web applications even close to ASP.NET with either Java tools or Mono? That is, what a good comparison would be in the costs of a decent DB and programming tools along with any server software required to serve up the web application? Some may think it is always free on Linux, but things like MySQL, where they have dual licenses that many commercial uses will have to pay licensing fees. Whenever I explored the issue much in the past it appeared almost everything was free, but with futher exploration, I found that there were quite a few that ended up with heavy licensing fees. With MS, you can usually use SQL Server Express for the database unless you are doing large amounts of data, so that is basically free. You have the cost of the OS, but that is already usually taken into account when you lease your dedicated server. Then you have your development tools and the only real choice is VS. Add on to that a MSDN universal (or whatever they are calling it nowadays) and that will be the majority of any costs. So, for MS, you are talking about perhaps around $2,700 per year per developer to build web applications and no real extra costs on serving them (okay, so the dedicated server might cost you $20-$30 more per month per server for a Windows Server 2003 than Linux installs and $95 more per month if the server has SQL Server Workgroups edition). How does that stack up with similar offerings on Linux? Anyone have an idea? Remember, I would not want dog food for development tools, they would have to be close in caliber to VS. Rocky <>< My Blog[^]
In my experience when looking for dedicated, virtual, etc hosting companies... Linux usually beats M$ options by about half. Where you might usually pay $250/Month for a Windows setup you can get the exact same machine running LAMP for $99/Month. I switched to LAMP. Everything Windows costs $$$...PHP has an almost infinite supply of OSS - much of it is free! Lots of it sucks...some of which is written clearly by designers turned developers... When programs look pretty...but when you wanna change something it's a nightmare...or it's written by programmers...but it's hard to pick up on right away. I find this especially true when dealing with CMS. I would suggest renting a managed server using LAMP - the hosting company will take care of all security updates, etc...leaving you free to focus on developing web apps using PHP or Perl. Both of which are easy to learn... And there is no shortage of PHP developers...if you find a shortage...gimme' a call...I've been unemployed for 2 years :( Just my 2 cents :) It's frustrating being a genius and living the life of a moron!!!
-
There is a huge misconception regarding this issue and I've seen it here even with some of the replies already. I know Linux, I know Linux well. I use it frequently to perform a variety of tasks. What I know about Linux has come at a great price. What I can say about Linux is that it's an amazing tool. What is always misunderstood in the Linux/Windows comparison is the experience of those doing the work. There are a few problems that are very difficult to solve and the lack of easy solutions can make Linux a horrible nightmare. 1. Anybody can claim to know Linux. 2. Almost every piece of Linux server related software requires *a lot* of configuration and will not do *properly* what you need straight from the ISO. Now there are tools that aid in this but even then you do need to have a lot of experience to know what to do. So theirs cost of correct configuration. 3. Now you've got the web server setup correctly, MySQL is working all the licensing is understood and settled. Now you have to actually learn the platform. Now you have to learn PHP (very well) to do anything remotely decent. So here's my observations and from experience I can validate all of them. A. Linux is free. Sure there's licensing issues and questions but a good attorney can dodge 99% of them with ease. Cost to own/use free. B. Configuration. Most companies do not have a Linux expert on board. Therefore they either hire one (How do they determine how good the expert is? They cannot, this is very dangerous and almost always goes bad for the company. Seen it 100 times.) or they assemble a team to introduce a Linux environment and qualify it. Usually 1 admin and 2 to 5 developers depending on the goals of the project. This is the more expensive approach short term but has the greatest ROI long term. C. Deployment. Now you have got it setup. It's configured and running well. The security is tight. Enter the developers. Developers must now invest a lot of time in learning the platform, the CLI, permissions. IIS does not exist nor does the pretty graphics. You config a lot of scripts to get applications to work correctly. The PHP learning curve takes time. Writing good well formed code takes even more time. Making sure your code is secure even more time. So is Linux really cheaper? Yes but here's the catch. It's a marriage to Linux, you are going to have children and lots of them. Divorce will be costly because with Linux you don't get any prenups. Expect 5 full years before you not only see ROI but Linux is driving profits. You thi
I would agree with most of what you say but I cannot agree 100%. I do not believe that Windows is the pioneer and Linux the catch-up all the time. I think there are many places where both are pioneer and both play catch-up. I disagree that getting up to speed with PHP is that hard - it is based on C/C++ and will be familiar to many programmers immediately. I do not agree that Linux is maturing "more slowly" (more slowly than what btw?) as, for example, the 2.6.12 kernel has been certified as _very_ secure and bug-free. I also do not agree that Windows administration is that much easier than Linux - my grandmother could manage neither so clearly you have to hire a professional for either. True there are more professionals familiar with Windows than Linux. True that having a graphical front-end is "easier" than scripting things. :)
-
I would agree with most of what you say but I cannot agree 100%. I do not believe that Windows is the pioneer and Linux the catch-up all the time. I think there are many places where both are pioneer and both play catch-up. I disagree that getting up to speed with PHP is that hard - it is based on C/C++ and will be familiar to many programmers immediately. I do not agree that Linux is maturing "more slowly" (more slowly than what btw?) as, for example, the 2.6.12 kernel has been certified as _very_ secure and bug-free. I also do not agree that Windows administration is that much easier than Linux - my grandmother could manage neither so clearly you have to hire a professional for either. True there are more professionals familiar with Windows than Linux. True that having a graphical front-end is "easier" than scripting things. :)
You are taking the cultist stance which is pretty much verbatim what I expect. If you want to argue point for point on each of these things you're talking to the wrong person. I own and operate a business that provides software and IT to non-technical businesses. I've done tons of Linux and tons of Windows and frankly you are wrong. What most people (real businesses not Linux touting fruit cakes who are so caught in a product they have forgotten about the customer) want are services and technologies that are being pioneered by Microsoft. Outlook for example. Say what you want Linux isn't there yet. In fact it's a heck of a long ways away. From fruitcake perspective the Linux equivalent is just as good. From a Windows user that works in Windows that you put Zimian in front they get a glass eyed look and ask for Outlook. Say what you want about PHP. Learning languages and syntax better be something any good developer does in their sleep. It's learning the libraries, functions, frameworks and platforms that takes time to be effective at. I'm not going to argue this point with you. If you don't believe that you are wrong. Hop on a MAC and see how fast you come up to speed writing apps for a MAC in Code Warrior. Linux is maturing more slowly than I want. Deal with it. If you disagree that's fine. I really don't care. Your statement about Linux Vs. Windows administration is funny. Put down the crack pipe. Linux is all about CLI if you are going to be good. Windows is all about GUI-GUI-GUI. The IIS GUI does not exist (without a lot of work) in Linux. Deal with it. People coming from Windows to Linux get one heck of a UI shock. I know from experience I see it all the time. Lastly my comments about Fedora were experience based. He can use whatever he wants. Most people have heard of Fedora and it's got a point and click install with a great boot loader that any ding-dong can use. I wasn't caring about stable at all. If he's going to adapt an OS without doing any research on his own and selecting the proper distro for his needs then he gets to sleep in the bed he makes. I'm not at all interested in having cult-wars with anyone about Linux. My experience is real world and it comes from watching 100's of Windows users *try* to migrate to Linux and seeing less than 1% stick with it. You can spout zealously about Linux but the facts are what they are. A windows user/developer/admin going to Linux faces a huge learning curve and I'm not even going to debate that point. - Rex
-
I thought he was saying that Linux is generally no harder to support than Windows given the same learning curve AND that Linux generally needs less administration than Windows. I would concur.
He said he disagreed with my statement. My statement was that the purchase cost was a small factor in the total cost of the system, and is usually outweighted by the cost of support and administration of the whole system. What those costs are varies based on enviroment (user needs/education/etc.) and the requirements the system supports. So the original post that was only focused on the off the shelf purchase price was not looking at the right factors in making an assessment. I have said nothing about a specific OS. I will say there are also many options other than Linux and Windows for deployment of web servers (of what ever type, http, app servers, etc.) Ok Friends. I do not mind getting old. It beats all the other options that I can think of.
-
You are taking the cultist stance which is pretty much verbatim what I expect. If you want to argue point for point on each of these things you're talking to the wrong person. I own and operate a business that provides software and IT to non-technical businesses. I've done tons of Linux and tons of Windows and frankly you are wrong. What most people (real businesses not Linux touting fruit cakes who are so caught in a product they have forgotten about the customer) want are services and technologies that are being pioneered by Microsoft. Outlook for example. Say what you want Linux isn't there yet. In fact it's a heck of a long ways away. From fruitcake perspective the Linux equivalent is just as good. From a Windows user that works in Windows that you put Zimian in front they get a glass eyed look and ask for Outlook. Say what you want about PHP. Learning languages and syntax better be something any good developer does in their sleep. It's learning the libraries, functions, frameworks and platforms that takes time to be effective at. I'm not going to argue this point with you. If you don't believe that you are wrong. Hop on a MAC and see how fast you come up to speed writing apps for a MAC in Code Warrior. Linux is maturing more slowly than I want. Deal with it. If you disagree that's fine. I really don't care. Your statement about Linux Vs. Windows administration is funny. Put down the crack pipe. Linux is all about CLI if you are going to be good. Windows is all about GUI-GUI-GUI. The IIS GUI does not exist (without a lot of work) in Linux. Deal with it. People coming from Windows to Linux get one heck of a UI shock. I know from experience I see it all the time. Lastly my comments about Fedora were experience based. He can use whatever he wants. Most people have heard of Fedora and it's got a point and click install with a great boot loader that any ding-dong can use. I wasn't caring about stable at all. If he's going to adapt an OS without doing any research on his own and selecting the proper distro for his needs then he gets to sleep in the bed he makes. I'm not at all interested in having cult-wars with anyone about Linux. My experience is real world and it comes from watching 100's of Windows users *try* to migrate to Linux and seeing less than 1% stick with it. You can spout zealously about Linux but the facts are what they are. A windows user/developer/admin going to Linux faces a huge learning curve and I'm not even going to debate that point. - Rex
1. Outlook - I didn't mention Outlook. I thought the discussion was about servers not desktops? 2. PHP has a rational library that is very close to a standard C library. I found it very very easy to pick up in short time as would any programmer. 3. Linux is maturing more slowly blah blah blah. So you say it's a fact and I must deal with it. Can you supply any evidence to back up your claim? 4. Admin - I don't smoke crack thanks. I said having a GUI can be easier than scripting. Point conceeded. 5. Servers are about having secure environments to run mission critical applications and services on. Any operating system that is identical in all distributions will always be more vulnerable because an exploit that works on one system will work on all systems. This applies to people who use stock Linux distributions too. Having the ability to cutomise a mission critical component to vastly reduce the threat vectors it is vulnerable to is a VERY GOOD THING imho. 6. I also have no interest in having a "cult war" about Linux especially on a Windows site. My experience is also real world and happens to disagree with parts of what you said. Just because you do not wish to discuss things does not make your opinions "right".
-
He said he disagreed with my statement. My statement was that the purchase cost was a small factor in the total cost of the system, and is usually outweighted by the cost of support and administration of the whole system. What those costs are varies based on enviroment (user needs/education/etc.) and the requirements the system supports. So the original post that was only focused on the off the shelf purchase price was not looking at the right factors in making an assessment. I have said nothing about a specific OS. I will say there are also many options other than Linux and Windows for deployment of web servers (of what ever type, http, app servers, etc.) Ok Friends. I do not mind getting old. It beats all the other options that I can think of.
-
1. Outlook - I didn't mention Outlook. I thought the discussion was about servers not desktops? 2. PHP has a rational library that is very close to a standard C library. I found it very very easy to pick up in short time as would any programmer. 3. Linux is maturing more slowly blah blah blah. So you say it's a fact and I must deal with it. Can you supply any evidence to back up your claim? 4. Admin - I don't smoke crack thanks. I said having a GUI can be easier than scripting. Point conceeded. 5. Servers are about having secure environments to run mission critical applications and services on. Any operating system that is identical in all distributions will always be more vulnerable because an exploit that works on one system will work on all systems. This applies to people who use stock Linux distributions too. Having the ability to cutomise a mission critical component to vastly reduce the threat vectors it is vulnerable to is a VERY GOOD THING imho. 6. I also have no interest in having a "cult war" about Linux especially on a Windows site. My experience is also real world and happens to disagree with parts of what you said. Just because you do not wish to discuss things does not make your opinions "right".
{EDITED} READ MY POST BELOW THIS. THEN READ THIS. I'M GRUMPY TODAY EVEN MY WIFE THINKS SO. {/EDITED} fakefur wrote: Linux is maturing more slowly blah blah blah. So you say it's a fact and I must deal with it. You are difficult to deal with. I didn't say it was a fact. I said, "...more slowly than I want..." fakefur wrote: Servers are about having secure environments to run mission critical applications and services on. Any operating system that is identical in all distributions will always be more vulnerable because an exploit that works on one system will work on all systems. This applies to people who use stock Linux distributions too. Having the ability to cutomise a mission critical component to vastly reduce the threat vectors it is vulnerable to is a VERY GOOD THING imho. Good point! Especially when nothing I said had anything to do with that. I'm going to draw an observation here. The originator of the discussion was mainly asking about costs related to Windows verses costs related to Linux. My entire post addressed the general realities of those costs. I was not in *any* way making a platform comparison. I was providing my observations about the *costs* involved. You are dicing silly points that have nothing to do with the *costs* they are relative and largely differ from person to person. You have detracted this discussion away from it's intent and turned it into something seen all to often and I'm not even going to describe becaues everyone who's reading this knows it on sight. The problem I have observed with you and how you approach others is that you quickly lose context of the discussion and start attacking/defending on underlying points or statements that were not in any way part of the context the other person was trying to address. You have taken this topic away from the general concepts involved and gotten in to the actual specifics of the implemntation. I'm not interested in having this *chat* with you *BECAUSE* it adds nothing of any value to what this person was asking. It has nothing to do with facts or theories and has everything to do with contexts. If you cannot see that and you cannot see your detraction *from* that nothing I do or say is going to make any difference. *YOU* as an individual are going to have to change how read things. You are going to have to keep the context in the front of your mind and your emotions out of it. There is not some internet scoreboard that gives points for "th
-
1. Outlook - I didn't mention Outlook. I thought the discussion was about servers not desktops? 2. PHP has a rational library that is very close to a standard C library. I found it very very easy to pick up in short time as would any programmer. 3. Linux is maturing more slowly blah blah blah. So you say it's a fact and I must deal with it. Can you supply any evidence to back up your claim? 4. Admin - I don't smoke crack thanks. I said having a GUI can be easier than scripting. Point conceeded. 5. Servers are about having secure environments to run mission critical applications and services on. Any operating system that is identical in all distributions will always be more vulnerable because an exploit that works on one system will work on all systems. This applies to people who use stock Linux distributions too. Having the ability to cutomise a mission critical component to vastly reduce the threat vectors it is vulnerable to is a VERY GOOD THING imho. 6. I also have no interest in having a "cult war" about Linux especially on a Windows site. My experience is also real world and happens to disagree with parts of what you said. Just because you do not wish to discuss things does not make your opinions "right".
You'll have to pardon my grumpiness. It isn't directed at you. I just get so tired of the Linux arguements. It's a good product for a lot of people and everyone's experiences are different for a 1000 reasons. Learning curves may be short and steep or long and gentle. It doesn't really matter. Everyone going from Windows to Linux has some learning ahead of them in some cases a little and in some cases a lot. It's different for all of us. Having said that, someday I'm hoping to hold the moon for ransome myself and if I can I'll share the profits. http://www.ubergeek.tv/article.php?pid=54[^]
I know you can't become if you only say what you would have done and you'll miss a million miles of fun." - Len Work hard, play hard. Don't forget who you are and don't forget where you're from. Do all these things well and you won't have to wonder where you are going. Code-frog System Architects, Inc.
-
{EDITED} READ MY POST BELOW THIS. THEN READ THIS. I'M GRUMPY TODAY EVEN MY WIFE THINKS SO. {/EDITED} fakefur wrote: Linux is maturing more slowly blah blah blah. So you say it's a fact and I must deal with it. You are difficult to deal with. I didn't say it was a fact. I said, "...more slowly than I want..." fakefur wrote: Servers are about having secure environments to run mission critical applications and services on. Any operating system that is identical in all distributions will always be more vulnerable because an exploit that works on one system will work on all systems. This applies to people who use stock Linux distributions too. Having the ability to cutomise a mission critical component to vastly reduce the threat vectors it is vulnerable to is a VERY GOOD THING imho. Good point! Especially when nothing I said had anything to do with that. I'm going to draw an observation here. The originator of the discussion was mainly asking about costs related to Windows verses costs related to Linux. My entire post addressed the general realities of those costs. I was not in *any* way making a platform comparison. I was providing my observations about the *costs* involved. You are dicing silly points that have nothing to do with the *costs* they are relative and largely differ from person to person. You have detracted this discussion away from it's intent and turned it into something seen all to often and I'm not even going to describe becaues everyone who's reading this knows it on sight. The problem I have observed with you and how you approach others is that you quickly lose context of the discussion and start attacking/defending on underlying points or statements that were not in any way part of the context the other person was trying to address. You have taken this topic away from the general concepts involved and gotten in to the actual specifics of the implemntation. I'm not interested in having this *chat* with you *BECAUSE* it adds nothing of any value to what this person was asking. It has nothing to do with facts or theories and has everything to do with contexts. If you cannot see that and you cannot see your detraction *from* that nothing I do or say is going to make any difference. *YOU* as an individual are going to have to change how read things. You are going to have to keep the context in the front of your mind and your emotions out of it. There is not some internet scoreboard that gives points for "th
-
Wow! You really don't like people disagreeing with you do you? I honestly cannot be bothered to answer each of your points as they are bordering on the personal and I won't stoop that low. Have a nice weekend.
fakefur wrote: Wow! You really don't like people disagreeing with you do you? I honestly cannot be bothered to answer each of your points as they are bordering on the personal and I won't stoop that low. I'll phrase it differently than you did. I don't have problems with opinions that differ from mine in fact I desperately need them. I have problems with people who reply to other peoples threads in disagreement when it would have been better for them to reply in their own reply and just state their own thoughts and do so in such a way it's beneficial to the original question that was asked. Yes, I did get short with you. I think you should have made your own independant reply. Phrased your own thoughts and ideals using your own language and context and delivered it to the questions author in the form of an informative answer tailored to his question. Jumping in to my reply and sparring with me was not appropriate because it wasn't adding value to his question or anyone elses answer. If you feel my points are personal you are correct. They are aimed directly at you becaue you are the only person I'm engaging. They kind of have to be personal in that context I'd imagine. From me -> To You. Person to Person = Personal. You stooped when you replied to me in retort instead of to the author in content/context/composition of a well phrased reply that articulated your views and your experience. There was no reason or value in your cross-examination of my comments. I think the author was hoping to get a lot of different replies and yours directly to him would have been appropriate. - Rex
I know you can't become if you only say what you would have done and you'll miss a million miles of fun." - Len Work hard, play hard. Don't forget who you are and don't forget where you're from. Do all these things well and you won't have to wonder where you are going. Code-frog System Architects, Inc.
-
You'll have to pardon my grumpiness. It isn't directed at you. I just get so tired of the Linux arguements. It's a good product for a lot of people and everyone's experiences are different for a 1000 reasons. Learning curves may be short and steep or long and gentle. It doesn't really matter. Everyone going from Windows to Linux has some learning ahead of them in some cases a little and in some cases a lot. It's different for all of us. Having said that, someday I'm hoping to hold the moon for ransome myself and if I can I'll share the profits. http://www.ubergeek.tv/article.php?pid=54[^]
I know you can't become if you only say what you would have done and you'll miss a million miles of fun." - Len Work hard, play hard. Don't forget who you are and don't forget where you're from. Do all these things well and you won't have to wonder where you are going. Code-frog System Architects, Inc.
I've seen the cartoon many times before and I think it is very funny. I wasn't trying to have a Linux is better than Windows debate. I was trying to point out that Windows is absolutely great at some things and Linux is absolutely great at other things. Saying that people coming from Windows to Linux will find a steep learning curve is also true in reverse. Learning a new way to do anything is challenging. I also would like to have the right to say some things about Linux are better than Windows (and vis-a-vis) without being branded a rabid Linux cultist who hates everything Microsoft. It simply isn't true and gets in the way of sensible debate. Like I said - have a nice weekend. ;)
-
fakefur wrote: Wow! You really don't like people disagreeing with you do you? I honestly cannot be bothered to answer each of your points as they are bordering on the personal and I won't stoop that low. I'll phrase it differently than you did. I don't have problems with opinions that differ from mine in fact I desperately need them. I have problems with people who reply to other peoples threads in disagreement when it would have been better for them to reply in their own reply and just state their own thoughts and do so in such a way it's beneficial to the original question that was asked. Yes, I did get short with you. I think you should have made your own independant reply. Phrased your own thoughts and ideals using your own language and context and delivered it to the questions author in the form of an informative answer tailored to his question. Jumping in to my reply and sparring with me was not appropriate because it wasn't adding value to his question or anyone elses answer. If you feel my points are personal you are correct. They are aimed directly at you becaue you are the only person I'm engaging. They kind of have to be personal in that context I'd imagine. From me -> To You. Person to Person = Personal. You stooped when you replied to me in retort instead of to the author in content/context/composition of a well phrased reply that articulated your views and your experience. There was no reason or value in your cross-examination of my comments. I think the author was hoping to get a lot of different replies and yours directly to him would have been appropriate. - Rex
I know you can't become if you only say what you would have done and you'll miss a million miles of fun." - Len Work hard, play hard. Don't forget who you are and don't forget where you're from. Do all these things well and you won't have to wonder where you are going. Code-frog System Architects, Inc.
-
I've seen the cartoon many times before and I think it is very funny. I wasn't trying to have a Linux is better than Windows debate. I was trying to point out that Windows is absolutely great at some things and Linux is absolutely great at other things. Saying that people coming from Windows to Linux will find a steep learning curve is also true in reverse. Learning a new way to do anything is challenging. I also would like to have the right to say some things about Linux are better than Windows (and vis-a-vis) without being branded a rabid Linux cultist who hates everything Microsoft. It simply isn't true and gets in the way of sensible debate. Like I said - have a nice weekend. ;)
I agree with everything you just said *and* I'll try and get the onion out of my butt so the next time we cross paths I won't be such a damned grump. I cannot help it either. I am just grumpy and for no good reason... Well it's supposed to hit 106 today... But again, just need to get the onion out of my butt.
I know you can't become if you only say what you would have done and you'll miss a million miles of fun." - Len Work hard, play hard. Don't forget who you are and don't forget where you're from. Do all these things well and you won't have to wonder where you are going. Code-frog System Architects, Inc.
-
I agree with everything you just said *and* I'll try and get the onion out of my butt so the next time we cross paths I won't be such a damned grump. I cannot help it either. I am just grumpy and for no good reason... Well it's supposed to hit 106 today... But again, just need to get the onion out of my butt.
I know you can't become if you only say what you would have done and you'll miss a million miles of fun." - Len Work hard, play hard. Don't forget who you are and don't forget where you're from. Do all these things well and you won't have to wonder where you are going. Code-frog System Architects, Inc.
-
And I think that an open debate about the issues involved are VERY pertinent to the original question and hopefully the original poster would gain some further insights by reading the follow-on informed reasonable debates. :)
Possible and if I wasn't so grumpy the possibility/probability might increase. I also think I'm right. I think your comments would have been better to him. I'm just not in the debating mood today and that's a lot of why I say that. I'm very tired. Some weeks involve much less sleep than others and this one was too low on the sleep and to high on everything else.
I know you can't become if you only say what you would have done and you'll miss a million miles of fun." - Len Work hard, play hard. Don't forget who you are and don't forget where you're from. Do all these things well and you won't have to wonder where you are going. Code-frog System Architects, Inc.
-
Possible and if I wasn't so grumpy the possibility/probability might increase. I also think I'm right. I think your comments would have been better to him. I'm just not in the debating mood today and that's a lot of why I say that. I'm very tired. Some weeks involve much less sleep than others and this one was too low on the sleep and to high on everything else.
I know you can't become if you only say what you would have done and you'll miss a million miles of fun." - Len Work hard, play hard. Don't forget who you are and don't forget where you're from. Do all these things well and you won't have to wonder where you are going. Code-frog System Architects, Inc.
-
You mention "serious" web application. I'd look at what other serious web applications are using. I have to assume the costs of these serious web applications were thought through extensively. Amazon, Yahoo, Google. Largely Linux or modified versions of Linux. Database wise they are all over the map. Bits of Amazon use Berkeley DB, bits of Yahoo! use MySQL (but I assume only for the smaller bits) and eBay has some Oracle in there. I read eBay uses inhouse db systems too. IBM is another big database provider. Most of them use C with CGI and a bit of Java running through Apache. Remember these guys have hundreds if not thousands (and tens of thousands for Google) servers. You don't get much more serious or costly. They are also cost concious companies with boards of directors analysing every technology switch they make looking for pennies to scrimp and save. Sadly Microsoft SQL Server is considered a toy in the "big iron" game. So if you want serious it doesn't seem like Microsoft applications and technologies are even worth tallying up the costs of. Maybe a few rungs down from serious you will start to find MS backed websites. regards, Paul Watson South Africa PMW Photography Gary Kirkham wrote: The ability to destroy a planet is insignificant next to the power of the cliché...Star Trek had it in spades.
Actually, I said "Serious", not "Mammoth" :) Something above simple blogs and personal sites where a person might be running 5K-10K unique vistors / 500K-1000K page views per day and those are fairly heavy DB interactions. That would be more in line with "serious" web applications to me. So, in this ballpark, MS technologies function quite well. Rocky <>< My Blog[^]
-
MySQL grew because it was fast and cheap. It never was feature-rich until recently. I suggest Postgress if you want a free db which is also feature-rich. As PaulW said: if Google and Yahoo run Linux then surely its good enough for most people ;) bibamus, edamus, cras moriemur
[eat, drink, for tomorrow we die] Cool plugins for Google Desktop