.NET Framework unstable?

Some of the companies will switch because of MS's licensing systems. Linux is not in as bad shape as you said, it is very widely used for webhosting (web hosting on Linux is cheaper!), and its used in offices. Its not as good as Windows yet but Im sure i near future they will greatly improve.
 
I've noticed that almost all web-hosters are offering Windows servers, while only a couple of years ago the majority only offered unix/linux.
 
mutant:
Large servers are the only area where Linux is more cost effective. The reason is simple. Linux is cheaper to run because many of the programs including the OS are free. However, you need a knowledgable and skilled person to administer them. This works fine in a server room environment where one engineer can maintain many machines.
However, in the desktop (and small business server) environment this becomes a serious problem because the user does not have the expertise the configure the system themselves and often there will not be a specialist engineer, just the boss or a technically minded employee doing it as a bolton responsibility to their normal job.
 
mutant said:
(web hosting on Linux is cheaper!)
Click to expand...

As you said before, Linux is open source.. so of course it'd be cheaper to host your own Linux web server. But what does that matter? As Robby said most web servers now use Windows. I believe the big change started happening when PHP and MySQL were ported to Windows. Before it was only Linux that did this and PHP/MySQL was insanely popular. However, now, Windows can offer the same options AND more (FrontPage extensions, ASP.NET, MS SQL, Access, etc).

Here's a good example of some of the Windows web hosting services that can be found now.. go look at their hosting packages and what options you get. I'd like to see a Linux web server try and offer this.
http://www.webhost4life.com/
 
Hehe... theres 3 people against me but Ill try :)

Robby, a lot of hosts offer Linux hosting.

Banjo, Windows doesnt need to be administered? It looks like your saying that you can turn Windows on and magically everything is done, and you need specialist to configure Linux.

Wyrd, it is possible to have FrontPageExtensions on Linux, and that webhost you mentioned is very good but this one http://www.smarterlinux.com/hosting.html has JSP and CFM pages. Look at the monthly price of a server that has all those nice features and JSP and CFM which are very expensive on other servers(at least from what i have seen, but i may be wrong)
 
mutant said:
Wyrd, it is possible to have FrontPageExtensions on Linux, and that webhost you mentioned is very good but this one http://www.smarterlinux.com/hosting.html has JSP and CFM pages. Look at the monthly price of a server that has all those nice features and JSP and CFM which are very expensive on other servers(at least from what i have seen, but i may be wrong)
Click to expand...

Heh, FrontPage extentions are a pain in the rear to put on a Linux box, which is why any rarely even offer it. Looking at the feature list and not even having to scroll down to view the entire list, makes me wonder if you got my point. For $5/month on that Windows server I showed you, offers way, way, way, way more then what is offered on this one for $30/month. As for ColdFusion, I'd love to know who still actually programs in that. On a side note.. these guys don't even offer Oracle. How can a Linux host not have Oracle? You've got to have a better example for your argument then this host... :p Oracle is the only thing of importance that is not offered on a Windows server.
 
This was not to counterpart all the features of that host you showed, but just an example of the price for CFM and JSP.

I dont think this makes sense anymore :) when i find something better youll find better or if you find better I will. Linux has a long way to go but will get there one day.
 
I was not saying that Windows does not need administration. I was saying that it is much much easier for a novice user (which most computer user are, lets face it) to configure than Linux is.
 
Linux and Windows are both viable environments. So are any of the BSDs and many versions of NetWare and Solaris. Pick one and use it well. There's no need to bicker over which one is better since the argument in and of itself is entirely subjective. "Love the one your with", and for God's sake stop trying to prove superiority.

Bah! Do these threads never end! :rolleyes:

Let's get back to .NET...
 
The thing that always gets me about these arguments are the
apples to oranges comparisons. Computers and O/S good at
desktop work rarely are good as servers and vice versa. MS
started the concept of an O/S that would do both well (and have
since somewhat backed away from it). Linux is now trying to do
the same because if all you can do is run servers, you are never
going to have enough market share for people to take a 'free'
O/S seriously.
 
*sigh*

People really miss the boat on Windows/Linux/BSD/Solaris comparisons. Derek came through with the post that made the most sense. :)

While I was working for National Defense, my boss came up with a quote I will never forget. One staff meeting everyone in our department was ing about Windows vs. Linux (thanks to a discussion brought on by security issues in an open-source OS vs a closed-source OS). My boss, a fairly convincing guy, gave us his overview:

"Open Source is here. (He raised his hand horizontally, neck-height.)

Windows is here. (He raised his hand just a little lower than that, near the top of his chest.)

In a month, it will be the other way around. So shut up and use whatever you chose for your desktop."

Granted, he was only discussing security. But this applies to almost everything. Microsoft comes out with do-all productivity software (Outlook), de Icaza writes a clone (Evolution). Linux has journalling filesystems, Longhorn will have an equivalent. And so on... The discussion is moot.


But I just like to participate in the name of hypocrisy. :rolleyes:
 
I say it as it is :)


Groupware. Clustering. Virtual Memory. 64Bit Processors. Code Management. Directories w/ File versioning. Elaborate Rights Mgmt. I could go on and on :)
 
Heiko said:
VMS rules.
ruled.
Click to expand...
Visual Basic: 
Dim betterOS As String
betterOS = "VMS" & ControlChars.CrLf & "+   1" & _
    ControlChars.CrLf & "====" & ControlChars.CrLf & _
    Convert.ToChar(Convert.ToByte("V"c) + 1) & _
    Convert.ToChar(Convert.ToByte("M"c) + 1) & _
    Convert.ToChar(Convert.ToByte("S"c) + 1)
MessageBox.Show(betterOS, "What is better?", MessageBoxButtons.OK, _
    MessageBoxIcon.Information)
 
in my opinion:

MS = easy to use; everywhere

LINUX = not easy; not in desktop/office world

MS = No privacy; High cost; MSPeople think to be the best (...evangelist... phua!)

LINUX = free; if something don't work linux programmer generally admit it; everyone can do his little job to improve the sistem.

RESULT = i'm with linux for the ideas, the think mode, but i must "guadagnarmi il pane" (work to live), with the pc and until all my costumer become prgrammer i have to stay with MS.

P.S.
MS make very good hardware and video-games, why they make OS?

ByE
BiZ
 
Well my dearest Friends. i m very shocked to see what every one is saying . there is one thing . since Release of Windows 95 no any company is able to beat microsoft. and its a universal truth. tell me one thing . if you are a new user and we give you 2 PC with with Linux and other with Windows. and user will always choose Windows you know why ???
it is much much easier to operate.

and if some one askes for a some thing creepy choice for hackers and system administrators or programmers most of them probebly ask for Linux coz this is the only operating system which can be modified as any one wants. and do exectly the same what some one wants to do. but now things gonna change Many programmer use Windows based development tools coz its are more eaiser to develop applications in less time.

In Windows it always try to do every automaicaly. and if some user try to do something it shouws it a Blue screen Error. but things are changed now.

Windows XP is more stable and with .NET applications Windows 2003 .NET server is the best. below is a link to a benchmark

Visual Basic .NET Benchmarks
 
Back
Top