ed wrote:
> On Tue, 07 Nov 2006 21:14:24 GMT
> ed <ed@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 07 Nov 2006 12:07:19 -0800
> > John Bailo <jabailo@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Still up and running...not a nice way to welcome your new /friend/ ?
> > >
> > > http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver/facts/default.mspx
> >
> > they welcomed it just great with www.wehavethewayout.com, which ran
> > Apache on OpenBSD.
> >
> > sadly that information has disappeared from
> > http://toolbar.netcraft.com/site_report?url=http://www.wehavethewayout.com,
> > it was a while ago now. but amusing at the time.
>
> url:
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2002/04/04/antiunix_site_returns_on_mysql/
>From the FUD page:
""When we began Web hosting on Windows Server 2003, we expected a big
disparity between performance on Windows and Linux..."
Reality strikes:
Open Source Fights Back
,----[ Quote ]
| Question: The OpenSourceParking.com announcement cites a Netcraft
| report, which found that GoDaddy.com's migration from Linux to
Windows
| caused Apache to lose server share. Was this event the sole impetus
| for OpenSourceParking.com?
|
| Perens: Not the first. It's part of a continuing behavior pattern by
| Microsoft that I think it's fair to call "dirty fighting." GoDaddy
was
| using Apache (I assume on Linux) because it was a great technical
| solution. They didn't switch to IIS on Windows Server 2003 for any
| technical reason. The switch was accompanied by a press release by
| GoDaddy, containing Microsoft promotional language. Now, I've changed
| many servers from one thing to another, but I've never made a press
| release about it. GoDaddy wouldn't be doing that unless Microsoft had
| offered them something valuable in return. There has been talk in the
| domain business that Microsoft has been offering the large domain
| registries a wad of cash to switch their parked sites. There is no
| other reason to do this than to influence the Netcraft figures.
`----
http://www.itbusinessedge.com/item/?ci=15108
|
|
