Slashdot Mirror
Managed ASP Web Hosts?
maumedia asks: "I'm hoping someone can help me here, as I'm nearing frantic on this issue. I need a good Windows/ASP managed host -- a company that will manage/troubleshoot a dedicated server for us. My research has turned up either shared hosts, or dedicated hosts, and not very much in-between. If we're not ready to hire a sysadmin and pay for our own backbone, but we've outgrown the massively-shared hosting system, where can we go? I'm really hoping for an answer that doesn't involve a move to PHP/Linux, as it makes much more sense to us to utilize the resources we have at hand."
I would definitely recommend Rackspace. As part of my job I have dealt with them for several setups for both our own projects and projects. They're not kidding when they say that they have fanatical support, they've always been super responsive, given clear warnings about anything going on that might effect our service, and have proven extremely knowledgable. In addition to maintaining your server they are also very good at helping you grow and scale your enviroment as you need.
Rackspace is definitely not cheap but they are absolutely worth every penny and are perfectly targeted for your situation.
Sorry if this sounds like an ad but I truely have been amazed by my experiances with rackspace and will always recommend them to anybody in this situation.
Reason?
Go lookup last week's (or 2 weeks ago news) under the spam section here on slashdot? Godaddy has done some unethical things with leaving their sendmail relay's open and then closing your account and hijacking your domain for punishment for spamming even though someone else spammed by using their open relay under your domain name. Sleezy and could be expensive for several days of downtime while your legal team faxes threatening documents until your domain name is released back.
Even if you own your domain name its still not a company I would want to do business with.
http://saveie6.com/
What does windows.forms support have to do with ASP.NET?
You just did. It wouldn't hurt to do a little Google research, as most of the things you say are so untrue that I'd mod you -1 Flamebait/Astroturf if I had the points.
Yes.
Most of the 1.0 code is complete. 2.0 isn't complete, but what's implemented should work.
I'd hardly call 4210 applications "limited". Now, I have no clue how many of those work, or work well without tweaking, but between Wine and Cedega, I rarely run into legit apps that don't work. Of course, tools for pirating stuff like Daemon Tools causes problems...
But maybe try it before you knock it? Recent Wines are actually getting pretty damn good. It's amazing how often I'll just download some random free app off the Internet and have it work flawlessly.
More importantly, are you familiar with the history of Linux? Unix was as proprietary an OS as they come, yet they actually published APIs and stuck to them. The GNU people were essentially doing what the WineLib people are doing -- reimplementing the APIs. They weren't shooting for binary compatibility, but they wanted people to be able to take any Unix program and, with a minimum of tweaking, recompile it for the GNU system.
And really, you don't need 100% compatibility. Getting 99% compatibility probably means you get 99% of people able to switch to Linux, which means the 1% stuck on Windows are about as relevant as the 1% currently stuck on DOS.
Mono is even easier, because it was designed to be cross-platform. The actual, official Microsoft .NET code has been ported to Linux, so we know it can be done. And no sane opensource person is afraid of it because it's Microsoft's tech -- if it comes to that, we can always fork it. The fact that it was designed by an evil/incompetent corporation doesn't necessarily mean the tech was a bad idea. Think about it -- how relevant is the original AT&T Unix compared to Linux these days?
I wouldn't count on it. If the server is cracked, the "ISP" (hosting provider, most of them don't sell Internet access) certainly has a problem. But who's going to answer why you went with that provider?
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!