In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Roy Schestowitz
<newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote
on Tue, 03 Oct 2006 16:26:54 +0100
<46412108.3ApAC9llDe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> Deciding Between Windows Web Hosting And Linux Web Hosting
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | Many people recognize Linux Web Hosting as the best type of web
> | hosting solution around, because of the added advantages of this
> | web hosting solutions, which provide reliability, security,
> | functionality, and affordability all in the one package.
> `----
>
> http://www.txt-m8s.com/article/title/52399/
>
> The funny thing is that the only disadvantage listed for Linux is that it's
> not Windows.
*double-take* Huh?
In any event, asking about Windows versus Linux web hosting
is a bit like asking whether one should use a wheel or
a track sled in a ATV. Both are useful but there's a bit
more involved to the vehicle than that. :-)
For example, the Linux side mentions MySQL, a database
portion (one of several); presumably the Windows side could
use SQL Server. The article does not even mention IIS,
Apache, JBoss, etc.
As for accomodation of Windows applications: IE is one
such, and Apache seems to do well enough therefor. :-)
But that's a quibble; presumably the author is discussing
server-side software. I frankly don't know how well Linux
would work talking to a SQL Server system using ODBC.
(Java might work reasonably well.) There are of course
issues using VBasic, though AIUI there's a payware solution
for that.
--
#191, ewill3@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
New Technology? Not There. No Thanks.
|
|
