__/ [ ed ] on Friday 22 September 2006 22:00 \__
> On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 03:28:33 +0100
> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> Why Linux Hosting is Gaining More Presence Than Windows Hosting?
>>
>> ,----[ Quote ]
>> | (Key points)
>> |
>> | The menace of viruses
>> |
>> | Stable and Robust
>> |
>> | Low cost of ownership
>> |
>> | User Friendly
>> |
>> | Easy to move between hosts
>> |
>> | Most widely used
>> |
>> | Scalability
>> `----
>
> I ran the hosting department at work a short while ago, linux doesnt
> just outperform in the technical spec, it's superior from a management
> point of view also. Imagine manually making those little changes to site
> configurations which can all be done so easily with a few lines of
> bash/perl.. taxing just doesn't describe things in the windows hosting
> world.
>
> For more proof look at the market, how much more does a hosting provider
> charge for windows hosting?
I found that's it is not conspicuously a matter of cost (initial cost seems
to suggest parity). What you get for basic hosting is so mere. Every little
addition (can be as fundamental as Web statistics) forces you to open up
your wallet. This reminds me of Windows, which comes with Paint and Wordpad.
You are then required to purchase Office to open your old(er) files, among
other things. Moreover, I have been in close touch with my hosts, so I
regularly see this. And Windows uptime (site and mail) seems appalling as
well, based on what I observe in the forums.
The BSD host that I have has retained fairly good uptime as well. But the
service and facilities are awfully disappointing because the server is old
and it rarely seems to get any updates.
Best wishes,
Roy
--
Roy S. Schestowitz The Holy Bible: http://www.gtk.org/documentation.html
http://Schestowitz.com | SuSE GNU/Linux ¦ PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
run-level 5 Jul 20 12:15 last=S
http://iuron.com - help build a non-profit search engine
|
|
