I am with you there! I am a system architect. That means that if a live system goes down - I get the kicking of a life time. I get feedback from developers saying 'but it would be much easier and faster to do this with xyz product (exchange, iis, etc). My response is that I really don't mind if it takes a days extra to do it with a product which will not fall over.
On the knowing everything. Apache comes from a UNIX background and that is a different mind set. Once you start to get the mind set more - the chances are that it will all start to make more sense to you. When I went over to using Windows systems I could not figure out what was going on - it works both ways to a certain extent - but I think the Windows learning curve is easier to climb.
I have run both IIS and Apache. 100% correct,IIS is easier to set up. However, it has proven very much harder indeed to make it 'bomb proof'. There is a critical difference between open source and close source that we seem to be missing here. If you write open source, people can see your source code. If the code is for a mission critical component (like a web server) then people are _really_ going to care that it is well written!
I have a motto about the differences in systems running on Linux (or FreeBSD etc) and Windows. On the xnix platforms, it takes days to set up and it runs for years without crashing. On Windows it takes minutes to set up and runs for hours without crashing.
Oh - and one other little point. It is very interesting to see the word 'monoculture'. One of the major challenges for farmers when they grown monocultures is preventing the spread of disease (like viruses) because lack of differentiation of species makes it so easy for disease agents to spread. Sound familiar?
Up to Vista, I found Windows best for home and business functions. Linux/FreeBSD was best for 24/7 servers. Now I thin ubuntu has taken the lead for the home as well. But the barrier for the business systems is much much higher, the alternatives will really have to pull their socks up if they are interested in entering the market in a large way.
AJ [www.nerds-central.com|nerds-central.blogspot.com| twitter/AlexTurner]
Slashdot Mirror
I am with you there! I am a system architect. That means that if a live system goes down - I get the kicking of a life time. I get feedback from developers saying 'but it would be much easier and faster to do this with xyz product (exchange, iis, etc). My response is that I really don't mind if it takes a days extra to do it with a product which will not fall over. On the knowing everything. Apache comes from a UNIX background and that is a different mind set. Once you start to get the mind set more - the chances are that it will all start to make more sense to you. When I went over to using Windows systems I could not figure out what was going on - it works both ways to a certain extent - but I think the Windows learning curve is easier to climb.
I have run both IIS and Apache. 100% correct,IIS is easier to set up. However, it has proven very much harder indeed to make it 'bomb proof'. There is a critical difference between open source and close source that we seem to be missing here. If you write open source, people can see your source code. If the code is for a mission critical component (like a web server) then people are _really_ going to care that it is well written!
| twitter/AlexTurner]
I have a motto about the differences in systems running on Linux (or FreeBSD etc) and Windows. On the xnix platforms, it takes days to set up and it runs for years without crashing. On Windows it takes minutes to set up and runs for hours without crashing.
Oh - and one other little point. It is very interesting to see the word 'monoculture'. One of the major challenges for farmers when they grown monocultures is preventing the spread of disease (like viruses) because lack of differentiation of species makes it so easy for disease agents to spread. Sound familiar?
Up to Vista, I found Windows best for home and business functions. Linux/FreeBSD was best for 24/7 servers. Now I thin ubuntu has taken the lead for the home as well. But the barrier for the business systems is much much higher, the alternatives will really have to pull their socks up if they are interested in entering the market in a large way.
AJ [www.nerds-central.com|nerds-central.blogspot.com