I don't understand why anyone buys a product that has so much DRM, is updated to lock out third party utilities and enhancements, had terrible battery problems which apple denied until forced to come clean, and locks the end user into Apples vision of what digital music should be.
Wait a minute...I know, they're fashionable! I guess fashion rules after all.
I use an IRiver IH120 20gb player. It has NO DRM, excellent battery life, optical input and outputs, supports mp3, wav, wma, ogg, plus I can update it with new features via firmware updates.
10 million downloads show a lot of interest in firefox, heck I downloaded it and am one of those 10 million but I don't use it. I was curious from all the hype surrounding firefox.
The number of downloads really doesn't indicate how many people are using it a week or a month after downloading it. I wonder how many people went back to ie after experiencing some of the bugs which have been reported or finding out they had to patch firefox because of security issues?
Can anyone say for sure how many people actually use firefox?
Manny people who own a DVR also have stereos next to their tv sets. Why not add support for digital music to a ReplayTV?
I use a DVArchive server to collect recorded programs and stream them back to my two networked ReplayTV DVRs with excellent quality. This gives me the ability to have an entire season of any show, NFL team, etc I want online and ready to view from either DVR whenever I please without having to deal with tapes or DVDs.
This is how digital audio in the home should work. A media server hidden away some where serving up video and audio content to an appliance that can provide excellent playback quality.
The solutions I see today don't seem to pull it all together into a high quality easy to use system.
No, it just proves that in a market (web hosting) where it costs less than $5.00 a month to have your site hosted that business have no choice execpt to use a free platform to keep costs down so they can stay in business.
First of all, the website does not RUN apache, IIS, or what ever web server software you use, the web server does. The websites are hosted ON the web server software of your choice be it apache, IIS, or what ever. Using Netcrafts methodology 1 Apache WEB SERVER hosting 1000 WEBSITES counts as 1000 WEB SERVERS. I find this very misleading, Don't you?
I guess the bottom line is Studies and statistics can be made to show anything one wishes.
Your comment that apache is far away more secure than iis is your perception. We have a number of apache and 5 iis servers which have been exposed to the internet for about 2 years now. We even have apache running on a Windows 2003 server and none of them have been compromised. Our IIS 5 server is proof of that. Why? because we follow best practices, we apply patches in a timely manner, and we collaborate to make sure we don't make any foolish mistakes.
Here is something you probably don't know, IIS 6 has ZERO as in NO security bulletins issues against it since it's release. Can Apache 2.0 make the same claim? Yes IIS5 is the poster child of poor web server coding but a properly patched and configured web server no matter what the platform will probably not get compromised.
Linux also has it's fair share of security bulletins. One need only go to http://www.linuxsecurity.org/advisories/ to see that Redhat had 14 bulletins in October, 20 in September, and 16 in August while SUSE had 6 in October, 8 in September, and 5 in August. Why the wide variance? Who knows, but I would not run just any distro of Linux and assume it's secure because it bears the Linux nameplate. How much do you think it cost to apply all those patches which were issued thorught those months? I'll bet that put a dent in their TCO numbers, not to mention kept them fairly busy.
Microsoft IIS, widely criticized for security and scalability issues, faced a perception of declining market share during the past few years. This belief has been furthered by the Netcraft Survey, which reviews every detectable domain name (not web server)on the Internet to generate its Web server statistics.
"Hosting vendors using Apache to serve numerous small sites bump up Netcraft's numbers in Apache's favor," said Chris Neppes, Director of Sales and Marketing for Port80 Software. "Netcraft's survey reflects a relatively high ratio of domains to Apache servers. If you look at dedicated hosting or corporate environments however, Apache's market share is likely much smaller.
Port80 Software's survey of Fortune 1000 corporate Web server market share shows:
Microsoft IIS: 54.1%
Netscape Enterprise: 21.0%
Apache: 17.6%
Other Web servers: 7.3%
By the way, Netcraft has a survey that pretty much agrees with this, but you have to pay for it...
Slashdot Mirror
I don't understand why anyone buys a product that has so much DRM, is updated to lock out third party utilities and enhancements, had terrible battery problems which apple denied until forced to come clean, and locks the end user into Apples vision of what digital music should be.
Wait a minute...I know, they're fashionable! I guess fashion rules after all.
I use an IRiver IH120 20gb player. It has NO DRM, excellent battery life, optical input and outputs, supports mp3, wav, wma, ogg, plus I can update it with new features via firmware updates.
It also cost less!
Sure, the Linux core may have fewer bugs but what about all the additional packages included with each distro?
10 million downloads show a lot of interest in firefox, heck I downloaded it and am one of those 10 million but I don't use it. I was curious from all the hype surrounding firefox.
The number of downloads really doesn't indicate how many people are using it a week or a month after downloading it. I wonder how many people went back to ie after experiencing some of the bugs which have been reported or finding out they had to patch firefox because of security issues?
Can anyone say for sure how many people actually use firefox?
Manny people who own a DVR also have stereos next to their tv sets. Why not add support for digital music to a ReplayTV?
I use a DVArchive server to collect recorded programs and stream them back to my two networked ReplayTV DVRs with excellent quality. This gives me the ability to have an entire season of any show, NFL team, etc I want online and ready to view from either DVR whenever I please without having to deal with tapes or DVDs.
This is how digital audio in the home should work. A media server hidden away some where serving up video and audio content to an appliance that can provide excellent playback quality.
The solutions I see today don't seem to pull it all together into a high quality easy to use system.
Is it really over priced or are people unwilling to pay very much for one Linux distribution when a freely downloadable distribution will due?
No, it just proves that in a market (web hosting) where it costs less than $5.00 a month to have your site hosted that business have no choice execpt to use a free platform to keep costs down so they can stay in business.
I guess the bottom line is Studies and statistics can be made to show anything one wishes.
Your comment that apache is far away more secure than iis is your perception. We have a number of apache and 5 iis servers which have been exposed to the internet for about 2 years now. We even have apache running on a Windows 2003 server and none of them have been compromised. Our IIS 5 server is proof of that. Why? because we follow best practices, we apply patches in a timely manner, and we collaborate to make sure we don't make any foolish mistakes.
Here is something you probably don't know, IIS 6 has ZERO as in NO security bulletins issues against it since it's release. Can Apache 2.0 make the same claim? Yes IIS5 is the poster child of poor web server coding but a properly patched and configured web server no matter what the platform will probably not get compromised.
Linux also has it's fair share of security bulletins. One need only go to http://www.linuxsecurity.org/advisories/ to see that Redhat had 14 bulletins in October, 20 in September, and 16 in August while SUSE had 6 in October, 8 in September, and 5 in August. Why the wide variance? Who knows, but I would not run just any distro of Linux and assume it's secure because it bears the Linux nameplate. How much do you think it cost to apply all those patches which were issued thorught those months? I'll bet that put a dent in their TCO numbers, not to mention kept them fairly busy.
http://www.port80software.com/about/press/012103
Microsoft IIS, widely criticized for security and scalability issues, faced a perception of declining market share during the past few years. This belief has been furthered by the Netcraft Survey, which reviews every detectable domain name (not web server)on the Internet to generate its Web server statistics. "Hosting vendors using Apache to serve numerous small sites bump up Netcraft's numbers in Apache's favor," said Chris Neppes, Director of Sales and Marketing for Port80 Software. "Netcraft's survey reflects a relatively high ratio of domains to Apache servers. If you look at dedicated hosting or corporate environments however, Apache's market share is likely much smaller. Port80 Software's survey of Fortune 1000 corporate Web server market share shows: Microsoft IIS: 54.1% Netscape Enterprise: 21.0% Apache: 17.6% Other Web servers: 7.3% By the way, Netcraft has a survey that pretty much agrees with this, but you have to pay for it...