Slashdot Mirror
Apache down, IIS up
Doctor Memory writes "Netcraft's June 2006 web server survey is out, and it shows IIS taking a dramatic upturn, at the expense of Apache. One of the biggest reasons cited is domain registrar Go Daddy switching to IIS for the domains it "parks". The report does go on to note that IIS is also making solid gains in active sites (including some large blog hosts), and further notes that it appears that large hosting companies are dropping Linux." Statistics are fun to play with, of course, but note that Apache's market share is approximately 30% higher than IIS's at the moment.
Just a thought, but Microsoft is probably as primed as ever to move aggressively on the Web Server market. Why not sooner? For one thing they've been busy locking down or trying to lock down everything else and manage the legal and foreign consortium attacks.
And, the first few generations of IIS weren't hardened. While Microsoft can (and has) dominated markets with non-superior products (not trolling, not saying "inferior", just not the best of breed), Apache got the classical head start on Microsoft, not necessarily (if ever) assurance of ultimate victory.
I've read articles, heard people talk -- it's hard to sort fact from fiction -- but I've heard stories of Microsoft coming in with big dollars and technical help to convert high profile and LARGE targets (Go Daddy, perhaps?) to their Web Server technology.
How do you resist that? If I had a large company and had ANY issues with Apache (who doesn't have any issues with any technology?, there's always something), I'd find it tempting to accept overtures from Microsoft.... "We'll come in and convert you to IIS, AND we'll help you do it, AND we'll give you money. All you have to do is brag on it in return."
I cringe just a little when I hear reassurances like (from the slashdot summary): "but note that Apache's marketshare is approximately 30% higher than IIS's at the moment..." I remember using that as reason to be confident about the browser market... there was a time when Microsoft IE's share was less than 5%. We all know how that bad boy ended.
If this is what Microsoft is doing (and IMO I suspect it is) this smells of once again abusing their monopoly in OS to extend their control of new markets at the expense of fair competition.
Doesn't seem to matter much if it's true, the current administration (in general) has shown little interest or appetite in reining Microsoft in.
First Post!
Stumbled across this tidbit from a NewsForge article on the Go Daddy move:
So, it appears that IIS is the webserver of choice for websites that don't actually need to be viewed. Hmm...
Also from the NewsForge article:
That sounds an awful lot like a 'yes' to me...sure, I can't prove it, but if Microsoft didn't pay or offer incentives, I don't think Adelman would have had any trouble making that known.
So, basically, it looks like Microsoft paid Go Daddy to switch to IIS for their domains, the vast majority of which were parked anyway, in a rather transparent attempt to massage the numbers. Quelle suprise.
____
~ |rip/\/\aster /\/\onkey
Yes, Netcraft has confirmed that Apache is now dead. Thank you.
Same shit, different day. Wasn't it yesterday that Didiot came out with an anti-Linux statistical analysis?
(Yes, it was).
Let's please get with the "right tool for the right job" program, and start spending our money on innovation and development. I'm just as much of a zealot for open source, GNU/Linux as the next guy, but I'd much rather see our time and energy go into making new technologies.
Read the only personal Runyon page out there.
well, after the apache person got hired by google to write GoogleOnLineCalculator and GoogleOnLineMinesweeper, what'd you expect?
Statistics are fun to play with, of course, but note that Apache's marketshare is approximately 30% higher than IIS's at the moment.
Thank God. Why does it seem like if your favorite server software lost too much market share to Microsoft, you would pretty much be emasculated? Do geeks latch on to software like jocks latch on to sports teams, or what? No matter what is said, it always has to be punctuated by "but my team is the best." Sometimes OSSers have more in common with Christian Evangelicals and cheeseheads than geeks...
Rex is 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
Thankfully, MS can only make so many gains this way. It's not like they can pay large percentages of the industry to switch over. At some point it has to come down to merit, and which server sys admins prefer to use.
Oooohhhkay.
So, after much years of expensive research dollars, Microsoft IE server has FINALLY become a highly optimized and finely honed webserver that serves just a single static page?
Most lopsided lie (um,,, I meant statistic) I've ever seen.
These numbers are meaningless.
What possible difference could it make to me whether godaddy parks domains with IIS or apache? If godaddy's choice moves the stats in a significant way, then the stats aren't meaningful.
"Statistics are fun to play with, of course, but note that Apache's marketshare is approximately 30% higher than IIS's at the moment. "
Statistics are fun to play with, of course, but note that --INSERT ANOTHER STATISTIC HERE EVEN THOUGH IVE JUST MADE AN INSINUATION THAT STATISTICS ARE TO BE TAKEN WITH A GRAIN OF SALT--
user@internet:~$ sudo apachectl start
Password:
Starting httpd:
OK, try it now.
The metrics from Netcraft are hard to read with respect to OS. They don't publish a free OS graph that I've found, and you can't assume that any particular percentage of Apache hosts are running on any particular OS.
All this tells you is that the majority of "sites" (that being a nebulous term) are using Apache on some OS as at least their front-line Web servers. They might still be back-ending to whatever, and that would not show up.
Personally, I don't think you can use Netcraft for any purpose other than to say "IIS and Apache are the most popular Web servers."
Really, seriously, why does this matter? And why is it slashdotted? Should we all convert our servers to IIS because a few big companies did? Post some real news already.
The parent seems to discredit the survey by saying "It is fun to play with statistics." Obviously trying to cast doubt on the numbers by saying that they can be moved around to suite ones needs.
However, since this survey is done monthly, the question is has it been credible in the past? Is the survey only being called in to question over it's validity now, because it reports on good news for Microsoft? Are we really so eager to turn on anything that provides positive news of any kind for Microsoft?
If this is what Microsoft is doing (and IMO I suspect it is) this smells of once again abusing their monopoly in OS to extend their control of new markets at the expense of fair competition.
Going into a business and offering to help convert to IIS isn't abusing its OS monopoly. They don't have anywhere near a monopoly on server OSs anyway. But of course I agree Microsoft is using its financial power and businesses shouldn't be quick to oblige.
Doesn't seem to matter much if it's true, the current administration (in general) has shown little interest or appetite in reining Microsoft in.
In fact one of the very first things Bush did when he entered the White House was remove all of the DOJ lawyers on the Microsoft monopoly case who had any legal experience with monopolies. Young lawyers replaced those already working on the case. And the expert independant counsil was fired without any explanation. Bush intentionally sabotaged the case against Microsoft.
Developers: We can use your help.
And you know what else is up? IIS exploits hitting my apache log files... :)
I also get a lot of php 'sploits too but I am seeing an increase in IIS "features" hitting my web servers. Wow, to be so popular... sigh.
A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing. Emo Philips
I personally love Apache. IIS is also a decent alternative, but there's something about apache that is just hard not to love. I think we all know by default that Apache on Linux = Free. IIS + Windows != Free. Seeing as Apache offers no downsides to as compared to IIS (to speak of) i have trouble imagining why this "upturn" is taking place. It's not like IIS suddenly got "better" or that Apache got "worse."
Could the whole GoDaddy deal really be that significant or is there another source?
Statistics are fun to play with, of course, but note that Apache's marketshare is approximately 30% higher than IIS's at the moment.
Has anyone else noticed that Slashdot is pretty much incapable of publishing any story with so much as a tiny semblance of being pro-Microsoft without taking some sort of potshot somewhere in the summary?
I'm afraid I have to disagree.
It's not like they can pay large percentages of the industry to switch over.
What makes you think they can't? They certainly have the scratch, and as they've shown in the past, they're not at all averse to taking large financial hits to ruin a competitor.
At some point it has to come down to merit, and which server sys admins prefer to use.
Sure, until your PHB strolls in and declares that "we're switching to Microsoft!". Remember, Microsoft doesn't have to buy^H^H^Hconvince you, they just have to convince the guy who holds the purse strings.
____
~ |rip/\/\aster /\/\onkey
So when Microsoft gains some % in market share with IIS all Slashdotters cry out: "This must not be possible", "It isn't true", "These values are meaningless!". Yet when Firefox or some other $INSERT_FAVORITE_OSS_PROJECT gains a couple of % in market share over Microsoft, everyone is cheerful and never doubts the statistics.
..., damn lies and statistics -- Mark Twain
SecuritySpace.com's web server survey. Of course the methodology is different....
Catch 22
Lt. Col. Korn, XO: All you have to do is be our pal.
Colonel Cathcart: Say nice things about us.
Lt. Col. Korn, XO: Tell the folks at home what a good job we're doing. Take our offer...
Colonel Cathcart: Either that or a court-martial for desertion.
"Academicians are more likely to share each other's toothbrush than each other's nomenclature."
Cohen
I think the reason a lot of these people use Windows Servers is because they get to point and click on icons, and are somewhat intimidated by a freakin' unix console.. which is fine.. i understand.. however, I bet if they had any clue about great Webadmin programs like Ensim and Plesk, they'd change their minds GREATLY about using Linux, or Unix as a server.. especially since its free.. c'mon.. its not that hard.. essentially you're just pissing your money away..
*plays the Apogee theme song music*
Microsoft's share was closer to Apache's in March of 2002 than it is now. There's no reason to believe it won't plateau or drop off again. There's not even a trend yet (like there was back then) that can lend itself to predictions.
^X^S ^X^C
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humor
my password really is 'stinkypants'
I can't fathom why large hosting providers would switch unless something is happening under the radar. Even then, I've managed both Apache and IIS. IIS by far requires more of a hands on approach and Apache is far more versatile in what exactly you can do with it.
I've rolled my own self-healing scripts that manage my Apache servers and warn me if something is amiss. Our IIS servers can be a pain at times...
I cringe just a little when I hear reassurances like (from the slashdot summary): "but note that Apache's marketshare is approximately 30% higher than IIS's at the moment..."
Personally, I cringe when I see editors making comments like that up there on the summary, rather than down here with the rest of us.
Apart from that, I agree with you; if one is serious about trying to keep IIS out of the web server business (for whatever reason), then the time to be complacent is when it no longer exists.
It's official. Most of you are morons.
note that Apache's marketshare is approximately 30% higher than IIS's at the moment
Microsoft 29.7%
Apache 61.25%
Apache has more than twice the marketshare of Microsoft.
That's the way I see it.
"better ways of doing things eventually just replace the inferior things" - Linus Torvalds 09-08-07
a much more interesting statistic would be the percent of actual web traffic served by server type and average traffic by server type _not_ including "parked" domains.
"total websites hosted" is meaningless, as I could set up a hosting/registrar company, park ten bazillion domains and offer to sell my domain parking service to the highest bidding server vendor (or just pick my favorite (KHTTPD? matchbox-PIC-server?????) to screw the other guys.
The difference between Theory and Practice is greater in Practice than in Theory.
*.blogspot.com should be counted as together, same with typepad.com. With all of the spam blogs created to boost google rankings, these should be counted collectively so as to err on the side of caution.
At some point it has to come down to merit, and which server sys admins prefer to use.
.and the world will ignore you.
Build a better mouse trap . .
Market an inferior mouse trap and get rich.
Ever notice that car companies tout the fact that their product is the number one seller in something or other? Why do they do that when what someone else buys doesn't actually have anything to do with my taste and needs?
Because it works. The great masses are herd animals. They instinctively incline to doing what they see others doing. This is an overall positive virtue in a tribe seeking tribal survival. It is also extremely easy to exploit.
Back in the day sysadmins were taken largely from the highly educated, highly cynical, highly independent portion of the population, motivated by their own drummer, the computers themselves. Nowadays most of them are just typical examples of herd members who got into computers because that's what they saw everyone else doing; and, of course, that's "where the money was."
They can be led. And if they can't be led, they can be ordered.
KFG
While GoDaddy moving all their parked domains to IIS certainly muddies the water, is it possible that .NET is actually starting to get some traction?
/ducks
No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
IIS may be up but the question of scaliblity just is hard to beat for them. My experience and those of friends who are responsible for larger installations is that IIS just can't handle the performance that apache can. It's a fine server (except for 5.0 *cough* *cough*) but when you're ready to play in the big leagues apache is the only way to go...
but then again I'm preaching to the choir
For the most part, the general Internet hosting market is pretty much the worthless segement of the market. Yes, this is an area where Apache/LAMP dominates, but mainly only because it's cheap for ISPs to offer the services and there's a ton of pre-cooked forum/ecomm/blog packages out there.
.NET much more often than Perl or PHP. (C) IIS is very very common on the Intranet, even for Java stuff.
When you get into custom developed sites, there's a few things to note -- (A) A large percentage run behind firewalls and will never be counted by Netcraft. (B) People tend to use Java or
The truth is nobody cares what GoDaddy uses to park domains. Maybe it's a technical test of IIS in some fashion, but is it really worth it for Microsoft to convert sites that aren't doing anything? Windows/IIS will never compete in the $20/month free PHP package market, so it's not really worth bothering about.
Whenever I hear the word 'Innovation', I reach for my pistol.
Apache is easy to use. There are a billion and one admins who know how to configure it. It's fast, extensible, and runs on Windows to boot. Why the hell would you want to run IIS if you're already running Apache? I have worked extensively in the hosting industry, and let me say that customers on IIS + ASP have many, many more problems than those running on an Apache + PHP/Perl based system.
In a web server environment, Windows costs more than Linux, period. Administration is more complex, downtime is more frequent (Windows requires you to reboot for a large number of security fixes,) site intrusions more destructive and harder to remove, and Windows Server 2003 gets very expensive in a server farm. Web hosting is a bottom dollar business; companies are trying to reduce IT costs, not raise them.
Windows is well suited for many environments. Web hosting is not one of them.
And I will continue to believe it.
All this shows is that Microsoft also reads it and has decided to make the biggest change in those statistics with the smallest effort.
Last month, there was a 40% difference in marketshare between Apache and IIS.
This month, the difference is 30%.
And it only took half a dozen companies migrating to make that big of a difference.
But that seems to be it. Those were the big players. They've been converted. That's the best Microsoft can do. We'll see how the numbers play out over the next 6 months. Will Microsoft target the more numerous smaller players?
When Intel's market share vastly outstrips AMD's, the anti-Wintel crowd cheers loudly about AMD's solid gains at Intel's expense.
When IIS makes solid gains in market share at the expense of Apache, the same crowd cheers loudly about how Apache still has 30% more share.
Guess it's all about the spin.
Seriously. Who cares about parked domains and what they are on. Parked domains are nothing more than a PR tool. A parked domain coudl be served from a dead simple serve-only-the-parked-page custom binary/script. Anybody relying or relishing how many domains are parked on their software has issues. Particularly since it wouldn't take much for a registrar to "park" a very high number of domains on whatever combo they wished. About the only interesting stat in the Netcraft report is that a little more than half of all "domains" are "parked". Half the domains on the web are nothing more than "for sale" signs by domain name speculators and entities who couldn't buy real webspace.
For those who actually care or might need to know which software serves up the most active domains, a report on just those is more beneficial.
Even then, why does anyone care how many domains are on what software? After all, a domain could be served up by multiple machines running different OS/Software combinations. So those numbers wouldn't be accurate either. Further, for those who may need to know "what server is best" these numbers only add confusion due to irrelevance. If you are setting up a truly large site, you'd better already know your stuff and don't need this kind of 'data'. The only data of this type that would be useful to you would be what the really busy sites run. Even then it also depends on active vs. dynamic.
As far as hostnames running a given OS, this too is not valuable due to key factor assumptions. The assumption underlying this statistic is that more is better. This is beyond mere OS capability. All hosts are not equal. A Linux box running a website(s) on 400MHz Pentium is not comparable to a Windows box on say a DL580, or vica versa. Regardless of OS in this case the DL580 will be capable of serving "more" of whatever it is serving.
The Netcraft web server report is a curious statistic and should be taken as nothing more.
My Suburban burns less gasoline than your Prius.
When netcraft numbers favor Apache/open source, the streamers fly and there's nothing but back patting on how this proves {insert open source alternative here} is a better product.
But soon as MS gets some positive numbers. "OH THOSE ARE ALL INFLATED NUMBERS THAT MEAN NOTHING!"
Guys pick a standard to hold things too and stick to it.
Personally I don't care who's on top, long as what I use works for me.
Gadget News at Gizmo.com
Two of us in the I.T. group here are windows people who have transitioned to the Linux side. Both of us can't stand IIS. Even the more hardened versions have problems because they delve so deeply into the operating system.
Apache doesn't. Just set it run as u/g nobody and mostly forget about it.
Granted, going with Scientific Linux or CentOS (or migrating to other gratis distros if you don't need locked-in 3rd party stuff like Oracle) brings the cost back down, but with orgs demanding 'official' support (after expanding enough to get non-hacker managers involved) getting 'legal' with RH can get verrrry pricey...
"If you torture data long enough, it will confess to anything."
I don't know who said this originally, but it's a great comment.
$nice = $webHosting + $domainNames + $sslCerts
I really don't care which is the winner here, I just don't like un-fairness. Im not trying to be shitty, I'm asking a legit question here. Let Apache loose some market share, then you might have a reason for your hearts to bleed.
Windows has more viruses because linux has more virus coders.
>> If you want any extra features you often have to buy them
Like, for example, what?
>> everything is managed through the clicky interface from hell
Bullshit. You can manage everything from script or even by editing metabase (which is an XML file) or web.config or machine.config by hand.
>> ISAPI hurts my brain
Yeah, it hurt Microsoft developers' brain, too. So now you can do just about anything from ASP.NET which doesn't hurt.
Where I've worked in the past, it seems that the Web Server of choice follows the Application Server of choice. .Net solution, just because of what seemed "a good deal" at the time. .Net integration part and processing data.
If management find a great application that cheaper to run, and maybe has a great support contract at a low price, they buy into the idea, and don't really bother about the fact that they have to move the front end web server technology from say IIS to Apache.
I've been in a situation when a brilliant Apache / Java / Broadvision combination, was replaced by an IIS /
However in my particular situation, us "Sys Admins" loved apache so much, we decided to leave it in at the front end, to serve media, protect the front end and internal-proxy the IIS data, and then have IIS as the middle layer just doing the
So at the end of the day, Netcraft reports apache, but the real grunt of the work is being done by IIS.
Mike
You used to have to buy the advanced server version of windows to get the load balancing (WLBS). It was significantly more expensive than standard edition. Now, you can buy 2003 web edition, which gives you the latest and greatest, it has all the stuff to do load balancing a couple systems, and the price is the cheapest of all the 2003 server OS's (~500 bucks retail). So, for 1000 in licensing, you can get a load balanced webserver setup. This will (and does) appeal to plenty of people out there.
Linux is good. LVS is great. But I would never say setting these up are easy for someone who doesn't have more than a little experience with Linux and networking. Setting up the new WLBS stuff on 2003 web edition is doable by most developers who come from a MS world...
I'm not advocating WLBS use, there's plenty of things wrong with it and I've had issues with it scaling up to 10+ servers (which is why where I *do* have 2003 web servers, they are fronted by LVS for balancing), I'm just saying that the pricepoint and ease of setup has to effect the marketshare...
This is classic. IIS is gaining market share over Apache. It's all Bush's fault!
Should you have a Windows machine installing IIS is a doddle. (Installing and getting it to display a web page that is - not running it secureley).
Compare this to the http://www.revis.co.uk/site/?q=node/2 Apache+PHP+MySQL steps that one normally sees. It''s not hard, but its very alien to a Windows user.
Thankfully projects like http://www.apachefriends.org/en/xampp.html xampp are making life easier - well, not exactly easier, but rather acting in the way that Windows users expect these things to act. It'll help home users get to grips with it, and a large base of semi-skilled amateurs makes for a bigger pool of potential professionals and higher penetration in the long run.
Think of the Children; Sleep with your Sister
I think at least a significant portion of this is down to the continued success of C#.
Now they win over a domain parking service and everyone want to say the statistics are unfairly in their favor? What about all the years those statistics worked against them, I didn't see you complaining then.
I like to work with Apache, but 2k3 server is a large improvement from MS. If MS finally getting their act together on the server front means they win back some of the "Netcraft share" than great.
Saying Java is nice because it works on all OS's is like saying that anal sex is nice because it works on all genders.
Google is your friend.
Especially this article from the first page of results: Slap on the wrist? (Salon.com)
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Is anyone else tired of these pointless pissing contests? IIS is up, Apache down. Apache is down, IIS is up. Apache is up, IIS is down. IIS is down, Apache is up. There that about covers it! It's the same with all the other pointless stories about Windows vs. Linux, PHP vs. .Net, etc. Let's move on shall we?
Statistics are fun to play with, of course, but note that Apache's marketshare is approximately 30% higher than IIS's at the moment.
Well, I never saw you making such a statement each time Firefox's usage is reported as growing when compared to IE's.
it shows IIS taking a dramatic upturn at the expense of Apache.
The report does go on to note that IIS is also making solid gains in active sites (including some large blog hosts), and further notes that it appears that large hosting companies are dropping Linux." Check out the bold words above.
Noticed how similar do they sound like Bush's crapola 'address to nation' speeches, with so called 'strong' words ?
Not only vague and generic, but also giving a 'solid','definitive' direction to the paragraph.
Well, im in hosting since 2003, im member and contributor to biggest hosting communities on the face of the planet, and i can say that linux hosting has become a phenomenon in the last years, leave aside losing ground. And in contrast to 'some big blog sites', there are HORDES of big blog sites running over linux boxes, and that is everyday increasing.
People should know their shit, if they want to talk about it.
Read radical news here
Yeah, That same decision worked out great for Lycos.
Now it's only a matter of time before the Apache are forced to live within reservations while their former home lands are turned into McDonald's and Best Buy lined freeways all running IIS. Really sad.
Uhh...you don't run your own business. You work for Microsoft (at least, according to your blog). Don't astroturf; it's unprofessional.
Igor Presnyakov stole my hat
then Apache is diying.
61.25%-29.7%=31.55%. That's the trouble when one compares percentages. :-)
Perhaps the growing demand/use of asp based web apps has something to do with the marketshare growth as well.
I know that personally, i'd host my asp apps on a Linux box if chillisoft was more common, but it's tricky to find a host with decent support, and all the features needed to run an asp or asp.net.
This is not the greatest
What do they have in common you might ask? Well as this article clearly shows... they both are dominated by denial.
but mainly only because it's cheap for ISPs to offer the services
You might also want to add 3 more points to this list.
Like another post indicated, Microsoft likely gave the software and assistance to go daddy. When Verisign/Network Solutions did this it didn't take them long before they were hacked.
So tell me again how I should have stuck it out and gone down with the company. I go around talking principles and freedom, I go broke. I stick the word "Microsoft" on my marketing materials, and I make money. Go ahead. Argue with that. Tell me how I should have been happy to lose my house, my car, every dime of my savings, and all the other crap I would have lost riding the open source handbasket.
I left a high paying Microsoft-related job for a low paying open source job. And I'm much happier now. You obviously invested all of your time and money in the wrong market. Don't blame your own failure on open source. That's childish.
Screw you people, I know who butters my bread.
You don't butter your own bread? You apparently don't own your own company for the pleasure of being independant. And if you think you must work with Microsoft to make a living then you're very ignorant.
Developers: We can use your help.
I would have thought that Slashdot would be using UNIX based server(s). Boy, was a surprised when I got this error when viewing a link in the PitFall piece...
The error clearly indicated they were using WinBlows server... tsk tsk... news for nerds? Stuff that matters? and they are using WinBlows servers? At least that's what I'm getting in error messages....
However, since this survey is done monthly, the question is has it been credible in the past
If you read the link, the largest movement of sites from Apache to IIS was once again at Go Daddy, with over 1.6M hostnames moving from Apache to IIS this month. If you read netcraft news periodically, you'll find that in the past mont they said: The shift is driven by changes at domain registrar Go Daddy, which has just migrated more than 3.5 million hostnames from Linux to Windows. Go Daddy, which had been the world's largest Linux host, is now the world's largest Windows Server 2003 host, as measured by hostnames.
In other words, there's not a "trend". It's just that Go Daddy is switching to Windows.
If you continue reading, Michael van Dijken, Microsoft's Marketing Manager for Hosted Solutions, noted that Go Daddy's migration to Windows Server 2003 follows announcements of expanded relationships between Microsoft and several other major hosters,
In other words, IIS has convinced Go Daddy executives thanks to a whole Marketing Departament for Hosted Solutions. Meanwhile, many other sites are using Apache just because they like it, not because a Marketing departament is trying to convince their executives.
Windows/IIS will never compete in the $20/month free PHP package market, so it's not really worth bothering about.
.NET / C# / SQL Server. With low cost IIS hosting, versions of Visual Studio and SQL Server that are either free or low cost, the features of ASP.NET 2 and DotNetNuke, I probably won't be returning to LAMP any time soon.
That might have been true a few years ago but not now. Have a look at the Windows (and Linux) offerings, including SQL Server, at JodoHost. I'm not connected with them other than as a happy customer. There are plenty of bad Windows hosting companies out there but there are also good ones with prices pretty much the same as LAMP.
I've done a few spare time projects for non-profits. Previously my only realistic choice for these was PHP / MySQL mostly because of hosting and tool costs but my latest project uses
and when you get hit by the next blaster or sadmind, go home in your car and count your savings so that when you go back to work, you'll remember what you are working for when you clean up the mess and revalidate all your systems.
.NET.
when your website reports "Server Error in '/' Application. Exception of type System.OutOfMemoryException was thrown." when you get slashdotted like the Pitfall article above, go count your money instead of wondering if your website could have handled the beating and served more ads if it wasn't written in
me, I'll go on my weeks vacation knowing that the only thing that could bring down my site and revenue stream is a catastrophic hardware failure.
I don't care if a doman is parked in Apache or IIS or anything else. I'd like to know (well I really don't care THAT much) how many unique web server boxes are running what web server. That's the only figures that really matter.
Back in the day sysadmins were taken largely from the highly educated, highly cynical, highly independent portion of the population, motivated by their own drummer, the computers themselves.
I think you are confusing "University Sysadmins" that dominated the early internet with "Corporate Sysadmins" that have always done whatever the boss wanted.
Whenever I hear the word 'Innovation', I reach for my pistol.
And do you know what I've noticed? I may be totally wrong here, but I don't think IIS even has a mod_rewrite-ish function! I don't know about you, but I rely extensively on mod_rewrite every day – almost all my sites are running a custom PHP/MySQL/mod_rewrite-based setup, and without it the entire thing would fall apart.
Creative misinterpretation is your friend.
With the new Slashdot design, TripMaster Monkey has become known as: L'TripMaster Monkey.
(Look closely.)
No link is necessary. Microsoft and Bush bashing in the same post is automatically a +5 Insightful. Now if the author had also worked in a slam on the RIAA, they would have a Slashdot Trifecta. Maybe there should be a special rating for that, like +100 Genius or something.
Build a better mouse trap . . .and the world will ignore you.
This is literally true. The Victor company actually did invent a better mousetrap, designed so that you can't snap your fingers while setting it. It isn't very strongly marketted though, and mindshare for the traditional style of mousetrap is so strong that most people still use old style traps.
"Because Science" is one step from "Because old book". Try "Because of my experiment testing my falsifiable assertion".
IIS has not reached the highest peak it had in this graph "Market Share for Top Servers Across All Domains August 1995 - June 2006"
It declined right up till March 2006 and has just started rising again.
realkiwi
the story after this one slashdotted an IIS server. Did it run out of bandwidth? Nope...it ran out of memory. lol IIS sucks ass!!!
\ machine.config could not be loaded. Exception of type System.OutOfMemoryException was thrown.
\ machine.config Line: 0
.NET Framework Version:1.1.4322.2032; ASP.NET Version:1.1.4322.2032
http://www.twingalaxies.com/
Error message below:
Server Error in '/' Application.
Configuration Error
Description: An error occurred during the processing of a configuration file required to service this request. Please review the specific error details below and modify your configuration file appropriately.
Parser Error Message: The XML file c:\winnt\microsoft.net\framework\v1.1.4322\Config
Source Error:
[No relevant source lines]
Source File: c:\winnt\microsoft.net\framework\v1.1.4322\Config
Version Information: Microsoft
Problem Report: Access denied to system because of URL Filter Configuration, while attempting to retrieve the URL: http://www.justfuckinggoogleit.com/search.pl?query =microsoft+bush+DOJ.
:(
Message ID: Blocked by Websense Category: Tasteless
Problem Description: Your system was configured to deny access to this URL.
Possible Problem Cause: Request denied, as specified in the local filter list configuration.
Possible Solution: Traffic to and from the internet is being filtered and logged. Access to this site has been blocked according to * Policy. If there is a compelling business justification for access to this site to be permitted, please present your request to the IT management at your business unit for consideration.
Even Websense is in on the conspiracy, trying to hide it from us!
Me = sad panda
Doctor Memory writes
Statistics are fun to play with, of course, but note that IIS has taken a dramatic upturn, at the expense of Apache.
Mouse traps are incredibly effective, and a snap barly hurts.
Why would anyone buy a better mouse trap? they are nearly perfect.
Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
...GoDaddy's revenues fell markedly as people found they could easily break in and setup their own sites at the parked domains without having to pay for them.
At the last place I worked at IBM did the same thing. They wanted us off LAMP and offered to give us 1-year Websphere and DB2 licenses (something like $10,000 per year afterwards!) and they would even re-write all of our web applications at no charge.
So as I'm in the meeting with these guys all I hear them talk about is their technology. Java this and Java that, scalability, DB2, XML addons, etc. It was all very impressive until I asked them a question for which they had no answer.
What business problem does our current technology fail to solve that your new technology can?
The fact is they had no idea. They didn't care at all about our business, only their technology. Our LAMP system already did what we wanted and I communicated to IBM that our business success had nothing to do with technology, but everything to do with the business model behind it. I'd be willing to bet that Microsoft isn't solving any business problems by converting anyone to IIS.
The global economy is a great thing until you feel it locally.
Best reply I've read this week on these forums. Kudos to you sir!
BSD is designed. Linux is grown. C++ libs
White man always put Red man down !!
Microsoft is making a BIG push right now to make it 'seem' that they are the viable choice. Negotiatibng with GODADDY and other domain parkers to manipulate statistics is part of their plan; all their salespeople then go out and quote nNetcraft stats to everyone neglecting to state WHY there stats changed and precisely what will happen to those stats when they actually go active.. in other words they will again go onto an Apache server in 4 out of 5 cases.
To coordinate with this, they also have been getting 'help' from another DiDiot claiming Windows servers are more stable than Linux. This is nothing more than an advertising campaign and they are treating it LIKE an advertising campaign. But Microsoft is deliberately manipulating statistics to support their claims when in fact they do not.
Always remember that 90% of idiots believe statistics. The other 10 percent quote them.
This is my sig. There are many like it but this one is mine.
What, haven't you gotten the memo? One needn't back up anything bad one says about the current administration. Why, I heard that Bush is in league with the Martians in a plot to detonate the Sun!!!!!!!!
The number of Active Apache sites went UP. That's in spite of Go Daddy switching.
Only the percentage of total sites went down.
My company is partnered with about a half dozen companies, so far Microsoft has been the most supportive, and has made me the most money out of all the partnerships my business has established. And the grand partner poster is right, good or bad having Microsoft on your mailers opens doors in many cases.
Perhaps you should pay attention to the fact it's http://www.twingalaxies.com/index.aspx?c=19&id=135 5 throwing the .Net error.
Microsoft isn't abusing monopoly here at all. They are using the fact that they have such an enormous war chest of cash. It isn't illegal to say, "We're going to adopt a long-term strategy that costs us untold millions so that we can win in the end.".
With the browser war, Microsoft won by abusing their monopoly a bit-- no doubt.
But this is good old fashioned capitalism.
How many Microsoft servers were running Apahce for MS instead of IIS? (I'm sure its a low amount)
@ the end of the article:
Sun is the sum of sites running SunONE, iPlanet-Enterprise, Netscape-Enterprise, Netscape-FastTrack, Netscape-Commerce, Netscape-Communications, Netsite-Commerce & Netsite-Communications.
Microsoft is the sum of sites running Microsoft-Internet-Information-Server, Microsoft-IIS, Microsoft-IIS-W, Microsoft-PWS-95, & Microsoft-PWS.
Nothing states what the sum of Apache was. Are they just assuming it's Linux only?
That which does not kill me only postpones the inevitable.
Why, I heard that Bush is in league with the Martians in a plot to detonate the Sun!!!!!!!!
You don't know how right you are! See here.
You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
LOLOLOLOLOLOL!!!!!!111one
Darn, I just used up my mod points, otherwise you'd definitely have my +1 Funny.
You're serious. Damn. What world are you from, and can you take me back when you return? PLEASE?
Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
If this is what Microsoft is doing (and IMO I suspect it is) this smells of once again abusing their monopoly in OS to extend their control of new markets at the expense of fair competition.
Not trying to be too contentious here, but exactly what Microsoft OS "monopoly" are you talking about? There are plenty of free and pay OSs that people can use without the imagined MS-Gestapo coming in and sledgehammering your computers.
Like everything else in life, there is good and bad in MS, Linux, Apache etc etc....we should be careful in throwing about words like "monopoly" at MS when *true* monopolies exists, like your local phone and cable companies.
never bring a twinkie to a food fight.
I'm not paying 5x as much for a plastic trap.
Then if that's the case, should any administration step in and stop Microsoft anytime they're successful at promoting their software? What would that do to Slashdot when, for as much hatred is directed at Microsoft here, this forum has many times generated much excitement over things like C#, .Net, ad nauseam and in effect has promoted even, if not especially, the trashiest of Microsoft's products and has probably helped them sell much of it. Should this or any administration then shut down Slashdot for all of the Microsoft garbage it has helped sell?
It has finally occurred to Microsoft that in this market they can buy market share, and get a good return on their investment.
Help stamp out iliturcy.
Yesterday, I went to start my new job at Microsoft. I arrived just after 9:30 and informed the receptionist I had arrived and needed to be escorted into the building. I filled out my parking form, and went to wait. This began the....
https://www.darklock.com/blog/?p=74All you have to do is *read* the blog, just read.
I wonder what Slashdot uses...
nothing
One reason can be that this is what paying customers want. If there is a market for IIS hosted sites, hosting providers will respond. Unless, of course, using IIS way too messy and expensive to make it unprofitable which apparently it isn't.
>Ever notice that car companies tout the fact that their product is the number one seller
>in something or other? Why do they do that when what someone else buys doesn't actually
>have anything to do with my taste and needs?
What are you talking about? Sure it does. You want a car that doesn't blow up randomly, right? You want a car that isn't a lemon, right? You don't want to have it fall apart the day after the warranty ends - like everyone else, right? If you live in a hot climate, I'm sure you want air conditioning too. How many other people want that?
You share many criteria in common with the general public. Rather, the specifics of car X versus car Y are where you diverge from everyone else. The complaint isn't that what other people buy is totally independent of what you buy -- but that it's not the whole story.
I'm sure you've used the converse of this argument before -- "XYZ isn't very popular for a reason -- that'd be because it sucks". Both are useful as a general rule with caveats, qualifications, and exceptions.
Am I missing the point here? Comparing the installation and integration of Apache, PHP and MySQL with the simple installation of IIS is fair? Does IIS just magically (black magic, perhaps) know how to connect to SQL Server, and how to execute ASP pages? If not, then I don't think your comparison is valid.
Just junk food for thought...
Yes, IIS is on the rise, but the submission fails to mention that the number of Apache Web servers still far outpaces all other Web server packages -- Apache is still almost double the number of IIS Web servers.
Very few colleges/universites these days have much in the curriculum teaching even basic *nix administration. I work for a college and we are a heavy MS shop both on the academic level and the systems level. We recently dropped all internal mysql application support due to lack of skill *nix admins on our staff.
Long story short...When students graduate they are more comfortable working with systems they know. Perhaps this trend is indicative of that.
What are you talking about? Sure it does. You want a car that doesn't blow up randomly, right? You want a car that isn't a lemon, right? You don't want to have it fall apart the day after the warranty ends - like everyone else, right?
And that's why I'm going to buy a Ford Escort instead of a Mercedes 600 or a Roller, although I'm not entirely sure how I'm going to get all of the band's gear into the thing.
KFG
Doing something over some time does not guarantee that every survey coming out from that source is going to be accurate, or even objective and not having secret agendas.
Read radical news here
Microsoft has been buying domains that are hosted on IIS. They give several registrars incentives to put the parked domains on IIS, so the statistics get swayed (reported on Slashdot a while back).
Another fact is that LightTPD (Lighty) is also making inroads as an Apache alternative, specially in Ruby and Ruby On Rails land. It is also being considered by many PHP products using the FastCGI interface. How much of a factor is this? I don't know, but there is a trend going on there.
2bits.com, Inc: Drupal, WordPress, and LAMP performance tuning.
> It's not like they can pay large percentages of the industry to switch over.
What makes you think they can't?
Little things like...oh...the Sherman Antitrust Act, anti-dumping provisions in the WTO, and likely future court rulings and legislation that might result from that sort of behaviour (especially from the EU and Asian countries that are slowly growing more hostile to Microsoft).
It is one thing to offer your your software for free as has been done with IE since the start. Even when Microsoft moved IE from the "Plus! Pack" onto the Windows install CD when they supplanted Win95 with Win95A there was not much to complain about. MS' practices became questionable by the time Win98 came out, when IE became a required part of the OS install and applications started coming out with IE dependencies as this put competitors at a disadvantage. I say questionable because even after a decade it is still a point of debate if such practices should be regulated.
With Windows Server, IIS is right on the OS install CD and is increasingly integrated with the OS and other server software (SQL reporting services, sharepoint, team foundation server, etc). This is reaching the point of being questionable behaviour, however I think the competition has accepted that MS has decided such things as web browsers and HTTP servers are "components" of desktop and server OSes respectively--and it is a bit difficult to complain about it when Linux distributions almost universally bundle such applications with their OS installs too.
as they've shown in the past, they're not at all averse to taking large financial hits to ruin a competitor
Absolutely. However, selling at a loss or giving software away for free (as in beer) is one thing. Bribing your competitor's customers to switch, especially when your competitor is non-commercial, is not only ethically and morally unacceptable to most people--it is almost always illegal too. The most definite line that would be crossed is going from discounts, to give-aways, to actually offering money or gifts to potential customers. At my place of employment, it is made very clear to everyone that exchanging anything but the most nominal gift with potential customers--even if it doesn't involve luring them from a competitor--is an offence punishable by immediate dismissal even on the first offence.
Sure, until your PHB strolls in and declares that "we're switching to Microsoft!".
I feel fortunate that the economic climate where I'm at right now is a job-hunter's market and a person can be selective. Even if it weren't, however, if *my* PHB were to just stroll in and pronounce that we were making major, disruptive IT infrastructure changes without previous consultation with others just because some salesbot from MS offered him some swag then I'd immedately set about updating my resume and finding work elsewhere. Not only do I not like at a job where the opinions and concerns of employees are not considered--it has also been my experience that organisations with managers that "stroll in and declare" such things are destined to fail if they do not change. This goes both ways, by the way--I think that it would be equally as bad if the PHB at an all-MS shop were to stroll in and declare "we are switching to Linux" without any apparent good reason.
No asshat, Screw You, LAMP is FLOSS, you work on it you get paid, period. Open Source pays your check. Microsoft just helped your marketing, If you were any good at marketing you wouldn't have to.
If you want to be paid, get a job. My job pays me to develop Open Source software, and maintain the closed stuff. New apps are Open because I get to choose.
Granted, if you want to write Open Source software in your mom's basement, you won't make very much.
After perusing your blog I could find no open source from you. Just rants about how its evil.
Show us where the free software touched you, Jimmy. Really you seem angry. Couldn't make any money, I see.
If your goal is to write,maintain, use, support a useful application (or device containing FOSS) open source is the only Ethical answer, However, if your goal is to make a boatload of cash you should probably not bother with software support. Because you didn't understand this you failed. Alot of people mistakenly thought there is a huge market out there to support FOSS but the truth is the market is in delivering the product the customer wants. e.g. Customer needs Web Server, hmmm 2000 to microsoft + hardware + Installation + Setup OR Hardware+Installation+Setup leaves a very hefty 2000 grand in my pocket or towards better/faster hardware. Plus I get the support contract which is rarely needed if at all. Customer is happy in both cases. You see .
Damn, I didn't even see that Don't Feed the Troll sign, Moving Along sir.
OSGGFG - Open Source Gamers Guide to Free Games
Hey, hey! Can I jump on your anti-anti-Bush/Microsoft/RIAA/Other-Asshole bandwagon too? You guys are SOOOO cool, pretending you're against the majority! It makes you REBELS!
FTA: "Apache's lead over Microsoft, which stood at 48.2% in March, has been narrowed to 31.5%, a shift of 16.7% in just three months."
So, Apache is still up!
FTHL: "it appears that large hosting companies are dropping Linux."
Because godaddy switched to IIS?
Most large hosting companies support both platforms, both equally with their benefits and limitations.
the only permanence in existence, is the impermanence of existence.
Here you go Panda don't be sad.
http://www.google.com/search?q=microsoft%2Bbush%2B DOJ.&start=0&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-a&rl s=org.mozilla:en-US:official
OSGGFG - Open Source Gamers Guide to Free Games
Is it hard to bear such a burden of enlightenment? Or are you just a dick?
You do realized that you're paraphrasing a Nazi in your sig, don't you? "Whenever I hear the word culture, I reach for my revolver." -- Goering
they're not at all averse to taking large financial hits to ruin a competitor.
True, and there are many examples in the past. But who is this competitor they're going to ruin? The Apache Software Foundation? Yeah, right. This isn't the same playing field where those tactics worked in the past. Apache is a community thing. There's no way to "buy them out". There's no possibility of bankruptcy making the whole thing just a memory. (Even if ASF runs out of cash, there's still a community to keep HTTPD going.) Microsoft's only chance here is to make IIS better than HTTPD. If they don't, then when the next version comes out, these paid-for yes-man companies are going to (if they want new features) either have to pony up the cash for IIS or switch to HTTPD. And if they don't have the cash or aren't locked in, HTTPD wins. And if the middle manager who made the decision has been replaced, HTTPD probably wins (because IIS is a vestige of the old regime).
And how exactly is Microsoft going to handle companies that turn down the offer? What're they going to do, buy them all out? This isn't the 90's. Microsoft has cash, but not that kind of cash.
they just have to convince the guy who holds the purse strings.
And then how difficult is it to remove the guy holding the purse strings from the entire issue by telling his boss that Apache HTTPD is free-as-in-beer (to say nothing of free-as-in-freedom) with equal or better reliability and uptime and no more administration issues than IIS? (I mean, c'mon. Really. IIS has that asinine and confusing management console, while Apache has a sometimes-cryptic httpd.conf file. It's not that different in terms of time wasted on figuring out an issue.)
So Microsoft will give you free support for any issues you might have? For how long? What if those issues include something 3rd-party like PHP? MS is going to tell you to port to ASP. That might not even be an option, if it's not in-house software. An Apache-support vendor will likely charge you a few extra bucks to add PHP to your support contract, and then you have PHP support from then on.
How exactly is any of that going to favor IIS over Apache to upper management? Sure, middle managers might be change-freaks, wanting to cause any kind of appearance that something useful is going on so as to justify their employment, but upper management is interested in keeping middle management under control and profits growing. The enemy of your enemy is your friend.
if go daddy stands the next ISS worm, and the hackings :)
We have seen this before, and we have seen the providers get back to good old apache after one of the massive attacks
I'll simply wait a couple of months
I'm positive, don't belive me look at my karma
It's not like they can pay large percentages of the industry to switch over.
I work at a major hosting company, and I can say definitively that they do in fact do this kind of thing, because I've seen it happen.
"And if you think you must work with Microsoft to make a living then you're very ignorant"
That's not true, you can be unskilled without being ignorant.
The revolution will not be televised... but it will have a page on Wikipedia
I see two aspects to this report. First, GoDaddy moved a metric buttload of parked domains. Okay, who really cares. Second, even without this, IIS is gaining slight market share, despite the fact that their product is pretty badly overmatched and overpriced compared to Apache. Partly, this may be regular old marketing/sales stuff. Some people will pay ten times as much for a lesser product if the sales guys take them to strip clubs for a week, introduce them to hookers, and leave a pile of blow on the table. It's business. It happens. Some of it, though, I suspect is simply a matter of keeping the same tools in use everywhere. "We need Exchange for Windows clients so we have a Windows based server already so we might as well use IIS for our Web site. Then we can use the same management tools." And, "we already have a huge number of Windows workstations and they use ActiveX for a lot of crap, so we might as well use IIS to host in house Web apps."
These last two cases I attribute directly to MS abuse of their monopoly and the court's inability to deal with them. The US courts said, "yeah they failed to comply and other vendors still can't correctly implement Exchange etc., so we'll do nothing but extend how long we monitor them doing nothing. What do you expect, we're crooks and they gave us millions in campaign contributions?" The EU courts have held firm on the issue. They're fining them millions a day while they still fail to comply. Unfortunately, they're making millions a day on these server sales and the EU still hasn't collected a penny. Eventually, MS will get the money to the right people and suddenly all those problems will go away.
Governments today that are representative democracies, can't deal with large corporations. They have too much money and politicians go into the field because they want money and power. Maybe it is time we moved to a direct democracy. I don't know that it would be better, but it could hardly do worse. Or maybe, we need to motivate politicians. Strip them of all worldly possessions when they are elected and take a poll of how happy the people are. Return their possessions and funds to them when they leave office proportionally to how happy the people are when they are done. "Sorry Bob, but while you were a millionaire when you became president, the people are less happy now, so you're down to 20K and a 1 bedroom apartment. Good luck in the private sector." Also, we'd need to viciously enforce laws about kickbacks from industry that was not paid till after they left office, although that is a very difficult proposition. Still, it might be better than the mess of corruption we have now.
the first few generations of IIS weren't hardened
:)
Of course not, why would they be? Isn't that why companies hire IT folks?
Which is more painful? Going to work or gouging your eye out with a spoon? Find out!
http://www.workorspoon.com
Meh I only read the first few posts, I don't have time to read two months of mindless babble from each poster for every reply I make to slashdot.
Oh! I almost didn't recognize you. Glad you clarified that.
One thing which bothered me on Apache were memory leaks. This was an environment also running PHP so it could have been caused by a haywired application. Nevertheless I noticed Apache gobbling up all my memory. The funny thing is that this occured after I moved to Solaris (and setup a default log rotation scheme). On my new setup I used "apachectl gracefull" after log rotation and Linux used to restart Apache all the time.
Now, I'm not claiming this to be an Apache flaw perse since I don't know if PHP could have been an influencing factor. However, I do wonder how many people restart Apache all the time and if anyone else has noticed this behaviour. It wouldn't surprise me if this could have been an issue as well.
Why provide evidence to someone who will inevitably claim it's manufactured by a liberal media conspiracy?
Fanatically anti-fanatical
I think this is likely due to the recent popularity of using .NET for development. I can't see ISP's "dropping" Linux, as the summary states. Likely they're just adding Windows servers.
Going into a business and offering to help convert to IIS isn't abusing its OS monopoly. They don't have anywhere near a monopoly on server OSs anyway.
The whole POINT is that MS doesn't have a server OS monopoly, though in the web server market (and server market as a whole) MS is still a significant player. Microsoft is abusing its WORKSTATION OS and PRODUCTIVITY APPLICATION monopolies in an attempt to reduce or eliminate competition in the server markets. Microsoft likes to call this "leveraging". There are literally only two consistently profitable business units within Microsoft--Operating Systems and Productivity Applications (ie. MS Office). This happens to be where MS enjoys monopoly status, and that revenue is used to absorb losses on things like selling XBox at a loss to compete with Sony and Nintendo--and to give massive discounts on server implementations to big institutional customers.
Also, this abuse (sorry...leveraging) extends beyond financial subsidies between business units: There is the issue of lock-in (sorry..."interoperability"). MS deliberatly chooses a "tightly coupled" approach: Tie in IIS with Windows Server 2003 (a product of OS monopoly), then release SQL Server 2005 with integrated Reporting Services (which works only with IIS as the browser), SharePoint (same IIS dependency), Team Foundation Server and Content Management Server (rely on SharePoint, which relies on IIS, and SQL Server...) and then build functionality into MS Office (the other monopoly product) that is closely coupled with the aforementioned server products. "Seamless integration" is desireable, but at the same time it should be as "loosely coupled" as possible--but MS doesn't like that because they don't want Office wo work with Apache and PostgreSQL and SVN and such as nicely as their own products--they want such interation to be annoying even if it doesn't have to be.
Bush intentionally sabotaged the case against Microsoft.
Seems your damned either way you vote in the US--vote for the pachyderms and you get politicians in the pockets of big oil and Microsoft. Vote for the asses and you get politicians in the pockets of MPAA, RIAA and the Hollywood machine. It's quite unfortunate really...
In any case the USA is not the world, and the EU and Asia still exert a lot of influence. MS is (and should be) still under close scrutiny. Innovation and healthy competition is fine, and I'm quite adverse to governments propping up unviable companies to create artificial competition. However, when monopoly becomes too established and starts acting immorally it is potentially dangerous to society.
I predate TSS, let alone the Internet and my mother was a government mainframe operator before my time. I am not confused.
There was a time when the corporate boss, totally lacking the armament of buzzwords (except maybe "transistor"), did not even have the tools to express an order (within the domain of the article) to a sysadmin/operator. And if the sysadmin didn't like it where he was, he walked. And the boss knew it.
This was power, because a sysadmin could not simply be replaced with another cog. The Register's BOFH is so bitingly funny because he has a real life model in real world situations.
A Fortune 500 CEO would approach the OC as a Greek king would approach the oracle at Delphi; as just another supplicant to be fleeced by mystical powers well beyond his comprehension.
This is why they started buying PCs. Didn't work too well. Just because the boss now had a small, powerful computer of his very own didn't mean he understood a single thing about it.
The boss gained real power over the sysadmin only when the technical "colleges" started pumping out generic, interchangable "sysadmins" in excess of demand, sometime in the mid/late 80s. And hence Dilbert became so bitingly funny because it had real life models in real life situations.
Dilbert dates only from the early 90s.
KFG
Is it hard to bear such a burden of enlightenment?
In those instances when I care, yes. When I don't it is no burden.
KFG
Great, first Black Hawk and now Apache :((
I'd disagree, things are changing. As computers become more powerful, the number of sites you can host on a single machine increases, which means there are more people to spread the cost of the software to drive them across.
The revolution will not be televised... but it will have a page on Wikipedia
Remember just recently when GoDaddy move all their parked domains to IIS? (Y'all should remember that, it was one of those big M$ uproars here on /.) http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/03/23/ 008229
Well anyway, that move has made all but one of my domains hosted with GoDaddy appear as if it's being hosted on IIS. I use the 'parked server' there to redirect the domains I manage onto another server. (I checked by actually typing in a few of my domains in Netcraft.) The meat of the sites I host are on a Linux server.
The first thing to ask is... what determines what a site is host on? Is it the server that answers directly for the domain name, or the server that provides the actual content of the site? (Obviously, the Netcraft data reflects the server that directly answers for the domain.) For most sites that's all one and the same. For me, that's about a dozen domains that show up in the wrong column.
But that's just my little handful of customers. I don't know how many other people do the same thing I do in hosting. If enough people are doing the same, the Netcraft numbers are seriously flawed.
The whores get mad when the sluts give it away for free.
Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it. - George Santayana (1863-1952)
Remember who won the great Novell versus Microsoft NT War? The result did not necessarily reflect which company had the most robust network server either.
-- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
If you don't have the time to check your facts, you shouldn't be saying that another guy is wrong.
It could be that it's hard to find qualified people to administer non-windows servers. There are more people who can setup a Windows box that wouldn't know where to start with a Linux/Unix box. That's part of TCO (total cost of ownership) and it's a real compelling factor when considering a platform.
Also, the memo from Bill Gates went out *years* ago requiring MS employees to identify themselves as such when discussing Microsoft online.
Hey, can I join your anti-anti-anti- Bush/MS/RIAA/Other-Typical-Slashdotter-Bogeyman bandwagon? I want to be cool like you pretending the groupthink and karma-whoring here isn't obvious and lame.
... and it's not going to be Apache. Just my prediction. Fine, let's see how long Microsoft can throw money at hosting companies and what not to promote their shit. Let's just see who can bleed longer - Microsoft and their big fat bank account or the Apache Project and all people around it who contribute and are not affected even a bit my Microsoft's moves. Most people who contribute to Apache don't even follow netcraft's stats - it really doesn't matter to them. All they care about is the technology - not "how to kill Microsoft" - which - obviously - happens to be MS's strategy against Apache. I actually think Microsoft's strategy as despicable as it can be is pretty good to gain a market share. The question is - how long will it last? ... Just wait until the next IIS exploit comes around and infects all those IIS-crap sites. Then I'll laugh my ass out.
It's the RAT traps that need work. Yes, you can scale up a standard mouse trap to 25cm long, crank that thing up to full power using both hands and one foot, and be careful not to whack all of your fingers off by mis-setting it, but when that thing goes off like a rifle shot in your kitchen, catching the rat full-on, right in the back of the skull, and the rat STILL DOES NOT DIE, and spends the next 30 minutes running around the kitchen, knocking over furniture, eyes bugging out, and REALLY PISSED because it can't fit down its rat hole because of the big-ass rat trap firmly clamped onto its head, that's when you know we are an inferior species and it's time to move to a new neighbourhood.
OT, but I had to share.
Could you please provide a link to this information? I was unable to find any.
It's scary being a Flash and Flex developer on Slashdot. You guys are unnaturally rabid.
Misleading; you, no.
Mislead; you, I doubt it.
Ambiguity; hmmm...
Choosing to report the difference in points as a percentage difference bugs me. (not really that much)
Microsoft has less than half the market share of Apache.
"better ways of doing things eventually just replace the inferior things" - Linus Torvalds 09-08-07
Although that quote is used by John Thompson I suspect he didn't create it. There are usenet posts back to at least 1998 saying it is in statistics textbooks. A further look across the web suggests the torture data quote was originated by Ronald Coase.
I take it you missed the the many hours of orientation where all that was addressed?
>this smells of once again abusing their monopoly in OS to extend their control of new markets at the expense of fair competition.
.NET--which is going from Java wanabee to very robust platform.
How? The IIS revival is driven by
If they are gaining on LAMP, it is because they are offering a more useful product than PHP/Apache.
i don't understand that people take the risk of a melt down after a new virus infection.
Run an ASP page, yes. Does that with no config. Although in W2k3 I think you might have to allow them on a config page, single check box.
SqlServer, it's not the web server that talks to the database, it's the ASP or PHP web pages. So the issue there isn't about talking to the database as much as installing the database. SQLServer installs pretty easy, just run setup and keep clicking next. I have no idea what MySQL is like.
That is true.
Also a problem for rat trap makers is that rats are far more cautious than mice (who are very courious). Poisening rats doesn't really work to well eaither (there is a good chance they explode in your wall).
Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
Yes, because nobody who's livelihood relies on Linux and other open source software would ever come to Slashdot and post positive comments about it. That would be totally unprofessional.
:)
Hate to break it to you, but this entire site relies on the FUD flying both ways. If it didn't have that, what would we talk about all day?
Besides, OS X is better.
Comment of the year
IIRC, it would be a violation of anti-trust law if MS used the money they made from their desktop OS monopoly in order to leverage themselves into the server OS (or any other) market.
http://outcampaign.org/
I'd be willing to bet that Microsoft isn't solving any business problems by converting anyone to IIS.
Be careful how you phrase your bets - I'd say they are solving their own business problems.
That's it! Netcrat is off the buddy list!
The Rapture is NOT an exit strategy.
Microsoft's licensing for web hosts is actually *very* affordable. I say this as the owner of a Linux-based hosting company that has researched this.
.NET applications from IIS to Apache+Mono.
With the SPLA, a hosting company can pay less than $20/mo for all their software licensing needs from Microsoft.
My company isn't yet offering any MS-based services, but we are looking to possibly add MSSQL Server as an option for those looking to transition their
a 566MHz Celeron with 128MB of RAM with the sql server going and separate ruby web bricks running at any given time? I think not. I did a project for school recently where our ruby on rails / apache project was all running off such a machine without problems. ..let's see you do that M$.
but note that Apache's market share is approximately 30% higher than IIS's at the moment.
Either "is approximately 100% higher" or "is approximately double" or "is approximately 30 percentage points higher" but not "is aproximately 30% higher".
This is comparing a 60% share with a 30% share.
OSX uses apache. I know this because my website's running it.
"Hello 911? I just tried to toast some bread, and the toaster grew an arm and stabbed me in the face!"
It's statistics 101: if I have one chicken, and you have none, we both have half a chicken XD
- 230 sites with a Server: Apache/* header
Apache is used in almost three times more high-traffic sites than IIS. if you're curious what the 115 other sites announced for their http Server: header, it was mostly GWS and Netscape-Enterprise, here are the top five "others":115 sites with some other product in their Server: header
86 sites with a Server: Microsoft-IIS/* header
68 sites with an empty Server: header
17 Netscape-Enterprise
9 Sun-ONE-Web-Server
5 Zeus
5 lighttpd
about sean dreilinger
It's not so much a question of buy-off as it is an offering of free services in exchange for mindshare.
That is the fine line Microsoft historically walks, and has done so with great success in the past. That is why IE is dominant--they took the hit offering it for free to cut the legs out from under Netscape and other competitors. As an aside, they also did it for another reason--IE started life as a Microsoft-branded version of Spyglass Mosaic. BillG absolutely abhors paying royalties based on sales and prefers licensing with a flat-fee. Spyglass insisted on a royalty and becasue MS needed to get a browser out there quickly they "caved" and offered a percentage of revenue. It wasn't long after IE debuted on the Plus! pack that MS released Win95A with IE included for free...and we all know what any percentage of zero dollars is...
The original poster contended MS could pay big companies to switch to them in exchange for positive publicity, which would actually be illegal becasue it goes beond giveaways and deep discounts and ventured into collusion territory. Although there isn't a very solid case against MS for "being generous" there are other things they do that present a strong case that they are abusing their monopoly:
* extensions to standards that only work with their OS (ActiveX, Active Directory...) - such a strategy only works if you have big enough market share to establish de-facto standards
* "tight coupling" using closed/proprietary (and usually obsfucated) methods to make less established products (such as its server products like its "Microsoft Dynamics" line) interoperate with its dominant products (MS Office). This creates firm vendor lock-in for enterprise customers. A more loosely-coupled, standards-based approach would allow 3rd party competitors to interoperate with MS products (like OpenOffice with Sharepoint, or using PostgreSQL as a backend for Reporting Services). Vendor lock-in is not illegal itself, but when it's done to leverage a monopoly product it is arguably abuse of a monopoly position.
I'm not sure how well it'll work against Apache, since it is a more established, mature system than IIS and Apache is already free (and Free) whereas Netscape relied on revenue from its browser and server products. Ultimately, I think that it'll result in a dramatic lowering of MS' server product licensing fees with a much larger MS market share (closer to 50/50 with Apache), or they'll hit a wall and no amount of price deals will help. It all depends on how well Apache development continues against IIS and how well IIS holds up under heavier use.
If you want Apache to take over IIS, just wrap a nice idiot-proof gui around it, replacing the irritating .conf files, then charge a modest amount of money for it.. something like $199 or so for the software with pay-per-incident support, or $599 for the same thing with unlimited phone support. It doesn't matter whether a product is good or not, it's all about how you package it, how it appears to the untrained eye, because let's face it, a lot of the people with buying authority couldn't tell a web server from a powerpoint presentation, as long as the powerpoint has a picture of a globe on it.
-Billco, Fnarg.com
"""there was a time when Microsoft IE's share was less than 5%. We all know how that bad boy ended""""
yea... the browser wars ended with Firefox, ophra, Safari, Konquerer stomping MS IE!
dont talk to me about market share! look at the facts... there are far more browsers... FANTASTIC browsers available now than there were at the hight of the "browser wars" IE counld not have POSSIBLY won.... other wise... thats all that would exist..
there really should be a law regarding shipping an OS with a browser!!!! that IS.... i repeat IS the only reason IE has marketshare! if ever PC user had to go to and get there own.... those number would be dramaticly difffert!
The core of the problem is that pure capitalism (beyond "lasseiz-faire"; even lasseiz-faire includes some governmental intervention, says Merriam-Webster) has an inherent instability in this area, and this is what anti-trust seeks to address.
--
Given enough personal experience, all stereotypes are shallow.
It is absolutely uniquivically NOT a violation of anti-trust law for Microsoft to spend money earned from XP to develop/imporve their server OS. Spending money on some things can be an anti-trust violation, but it has no bearing on the SOURCE of that money.
> Little things like...oh...the Sherman Antitrust Act, anti-dumping provisions in the WTO, and likely future court rulings and legislation that might result from that sort of behaviour
OK, so let me just get this straight. You're actually serious here...
You think, that what's gonna stop MICROSOFT from doing something grossly unethical would be...
THE LAW?! LMAO!
Mod me down if you want for pointing it out, but the law has about as much effect on Microsoft as I do. They've PROVEN that they're above the law before. How many times do they have to do that before you accept it? Microsoft (like any ridiculously rich company) can do whatever it wants. It's the law that has to adapt.
> (especially from the EU and Asian countries that are slowly growing more hostile to Microsoft).
Well...Maybe non-US governments will treat them a little less gently. But keep in mind, politicians in those countries love money just as much as our US politicians do. And--more importantly--look at what happened the last time the mighty EU got angry at Microsoft: A few fines and Windows XP Home Edition "N." Oooh, what a mighty blow for justice! Yep, offering that edition righted all the wrongs. Justice served and lesson learned, right? Thanks, EU! Yeah. Right. Pardon me while I choke on the lameness of that punishment.
Welcome to capitalism. This is how we do things.
Ford F150?
Or are you just a dick?
:)
No, he's KFG.
Exactly! Although it's actually a Windstar I've been looking at. I seem to be going through a reverse midlife crisis, trading in a lifetime of hot two seater ownership to get a minivan.
What's happening to me? If I didn't also find myself recently drooling over a Pontiac (Ow!) Solstice I'd be getting worried about myself. I asked the salesman, "Assuming I have my girlfriend with me, where do I put this?" and waved my guitar case at him.
He replied, "Keep the guitar, get rid of the girl."
Maybe he's right.
Or maybe I'll just get a minivan. It seems to suit my needs at the moment.
KFG
Yeah, and more schools are teaching MS products and offering MS Certifications than Apache/Linux.
The sysadmins have to learn somewhere, and it just so happens that many who get hired are because they happen to have those programs under their belt, regardless of how good of a sysadmin they really are.
Maybe it's just me. But I can not veiw slashdot messages with opera 9 beta anymore. It hangs constantly when I try.
Firefox works just fine.
IIS 6 has been solid as a rock for me. 5 required effort to keep secure, but 6 is like a dream. 27 servers x 3 years and no complaints.
F.
____
TechsteRSS
Although msft was convicted, msft didn't even get a slap on the wrist. Even with msft's faked videotape testomony.
Lately the DoJ has gotten really tough, because msft has not complied with any DoJ ruling. The DoJ had decided they would continue to watch msft. Oh boy, *that* will teach msft!
Those "better" mousetraps suck. My house had a mouse problem a couple years ago, and we tried everything, poison, those traps, traditional traps, non-lethal traps (which any mouse that was caught in one was immediately flushed, thereby negating the non-lethal aspect). The things that worked? A bunch of poison in the attic (bromine pellets, I believe), and the old-style traps.
Those new ones don't have near the snapping/crushing power of the old-style. They killed less than half of what the old style did (and since I had to "empty" each one, I know how many we had).
Like this: http://www.isapirewrite.com/ or maybe this: http://www.codeproject.com/aspnet/urlrewriter.asp
Where do we find this sort of data that excludes "parked" and other fake domain names? Or maybe statistics that just go by IP address + port, so a machine with 10 million names will only be counted once?
It does seem to me that Microsoft could take over the Netcraft Survey much more easily. They should just register a few million randomly-generated domain names, and park them on a single server somewhere. They could swamp apache's Netcraft total for far less money than what they've already spent making a minimally-secure server. This would be a much faster and cheaper way of buying the eyes of managers who think that such graphs are significant.
So, for those of us with a bit of understanding of numbers, is there a site that does a Netcraft-like survey, but counts only real machines with real servers talking to real clients? (For that matter, is there a reliable way to collect such data without being spoofed?)
Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
Uh this guy also wrote a blog entry about how much he loves clippy.... talk about paid shill
It's interesting to speculate about the Netcraft #'s, but really, people spend too much time worrying about it. Who cares what a million tiny sites use as a webhost? One busy site can easily serve more people than 10's of thousands of smaller sites. The Netcraft survey is just a fun, easy to automate, bit of research. The trends are somewhat interesting, but kind of useless if a single registrar moving parked domains can move the numbers.
http://www.securityspace.com/s_survey/data/200605/ index.html
They say something else...
--John
RYAN AMOS you arogant dickwit. "There are a billion and one admins who know how to configure" - yes of course after you've spent countless hours going through the untuitive documentation.
Productivity drives your bottom dollar. You are only looking at the initial setup/licensing costs you prick.
The local phone companies are very similar to microsoft...
They're not the *ONLY* player in town, but they're big enough that they could quite easily force any competition out of the market... That's why we have telecom regulators, who make sure the big telco's play fair with the smaller players.
Microsoft are the same, they're not the *ONLY* choice, but they're big enough to squeeze anyone else out if they want to, look what happened to BeOS. All microsoft have to do, is get people hooked on more of their proprietary technologies and keep them locked in. They could try making superior products to their competition too, but that would be far more expensive.
http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
That's one common vector for spreading IIS. And aparently what happened with the domain parking services.
You get closer to real numbers if you look at stats for active sites instead. IIS' recent upswing in marketshare was due to MS paying some of the domain parking services to use IIS instead of something practical, but they don't have to pay all the sites to switch just key ones that force users to use MS-only clients or DRM.
To get more of the market, it would not be necessary to pay such large percentage of the industry to downgrade to IIS. Looking at Sweden's current situation as an example (or more correctly, a warning), MS can worm IIS into enough library, radio/TV and government sites that it is able to start pushing MS-only extensions, formats and DRM, even before it reaches critical mass.
After critical mass is reached, it could then begin to required MS-only extensions, formats and DRM. The DRM, for example, could even be used to ensure that only MS Windows platforms have access, or even specific versions of MS Windows. Then at some point the switch can be flipped and non-MS or even non-Windows users can be locked out.
Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.
That's the truth. The point there is that not all websites are of equal weight when determining control of the market. Popularity is one factor and necessity is another. No one really cares or needs to care what GoDaddy is using to park its domains.
Some sites are both frequently used by large numbers of people and essential to them.
It would be control of sites which are both high traffic and necessary, though maybe relatively small in absolute numbers, which could give control of the market. Once control of the market is gained, it can be maintained (illegally) or further increased (illegally) by leveraging it to de-commoditize formats and/or protocols. In other words, forcing clients to use proprietary technology instead of commodity (aka open) technology to use the services on those servers.
So with a 20% global marketshare, effect on the market would be negligable if most of that 20% consists of domain parking. Conversely, if most of that 20% becomes government or healthcare, then the effect is quite profound.
No one cares about domain parking, but that by itself is no reason to ignore the server side. MS has abused its control of client side many times in the last 10 years alone, if one is to go by all the court judgements against MS. Though none of the judgements have yet resulted in any actual meaniingful action, let alone in a timely action. However, because it has been and is still being abused in an ongoing fashion it is being watched more closely. And perhaps therefore a move on the servers might get farther before it is noticed.
Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.
...or you should at least post anonymously. It makes later denials easier. ;)
I don't see anything that indicates Apache is DOWN. Rather, IIS is trying to pick up a lot of cheap commodotized blog sites and I personally don't believe that compares to other websites. Imagine how skewed the metrics would be if each MySpace user was actually a distinctly registered domain name on the internet?
Well I've not had any problem learning stuff in public forums. On the rare occasion where I got wrong information, someone else has posted saying don't do what the first reply says, it's wrong for these reasons.
It's ashame that it took only a month to be assimlated into this kind of MSthink.