The simple answer would be to turn off Java. The problem with that is your turning of part of the web. Besides, who says they can't do the same with Flash? or AJAX? Would you turn those off too?
According to your post, I would assume that ALL data centers use Apache as an HTTP server. As much as I would like for this to be true, it simply isn't. I worked with a company that had their web servers on IIS at a very large data center. The Web Designers where also the server admins. Not every company can afford the time of a professional server admin. How could these web designers be expected to dive into a text based configuration.
Microsoft has designed such great GUI tools for their server, that you can manage it via GUI remotely. The MMC console allows you to hook up to as many remote servers as you'd like, and manage them via "point and click". It's true, this gets in the way for very large deployments, try changing the root directory for over 11,000 virtual sites with MMC. In Apache, I can just open of the conf file(s) and do a search and replace. Of course if you have a large deployment, a professional would know to use Apache instead of IIS.
The point is, the reason why Apache is loosing market share is because, the "amateurs" don't want to bother with a flat text file. You would agree, there are more amateurs than professionals. Microsoft knows this and they embraced it with Windows Server 2003 Web Edition. The Apache and open source community also knows, but for some reason the choose to ignore it.
Additionally, with today's high power servers, a GUI isn't going to burn up enough CPU or "memory cycles" to cause any kind of noticeable lag. Windows 2003 has a constantly running GUI, so does Mac OSX Server. If a GUI is slowing down a system so much, then maybe the GUI is bloated or the operating system is poorly designed, but thats another topic.
GUI's are for the amatures (and entertainment applications) but not for server configuration.
You may be right, but not everyone is a professional, the amateur server admins are going to look for something easy. Not all business can afford a full time IT professional. Microsoft's success was built on making it easy for ANYONE.
I've seen those, and tried them. Comache is commercial and webmin is, well webmin. The rest are garbage.
We need something similar to OS X's GUI. Fedora has an Apache GUI that works somewhat decently, but unfortunately I found myself at many times going right to the text files due to the GUI being incomplete or buggy.
The reason is simple, IIS has a fully integrated and usable GUI to configure the server. As a server administrator, I do not want to bother dropping to a console and editing a text file. Even though (after some time) the Apache configuration files are simple to understand. When you need to do something quick, and you don't have time to stop, think, or plan, digging through a bunch of text files just doesn't cut it.
This is my only gripe with Apache, but I have to live with it since I would never touch IIS. MacOS X has a very good well integrated Apache configuration GUI, so it's not impossible to do it. I think the problem is the die hard console/text fanatics don't want to do it. I wish they would "get a clue", it's time to move on.
Webmin doesn't count, it's a web based GUI. Although it served me well, it's just too slow to use and at times can be very cryptic. Nothing can beat the power and speed of a native application.
If management is deeply hooked on Microsoft, they will never give up their precious "Microsoft Office Suite". No matter how much you try, and no matter how much better the open source product is compared to the proprietary stuff, it's impossible. Even when you have the two running side by side, and the Microsoft stuff is causing down time day after day while the open source products are running along smoothly.
Slashdot Mirror
I really like Skype, it's the only multi-platform video/voice chat service available, and the Skype out isn't so bad either.
The simple answer would be to turn off Java. The problem with that is your turning of part of the web. Besides, who says they can't do the same with Flash? or AJAX? Would you turn those off too?
According to your post, I would assume that ALL data centers use Apache as an HTTP server. As much as I would like for this to be true, it simply isn't. I worked with a company that had their web servers on IIS at a very large data center. The Web Designers where also the server admins. Not every company can afford the time of a professional server admin. How could these web designers be expected to dive into a text based configuration.
Microsoft has designed such great GUI tools for their server, that you can manage it via GUI remotely. The MMC console allows you to hook up to as many remote servers as you'd like, and manage them via "point and click". It's true, this gets in the way for very large deployments, try changing the root directory for over 11,000 virtual sites with MMC. In Apache, I can just open of the conf file(s) and do a search and replace. Of course if you have a large deployment, a professional would know to use Apache instead of IIS.
The point is, the reason why Apache is loosing market share is because, the "amateurs" don't want to bother with a flat text file. You would agree, there are more amateurs than professionals. Microsoft knows this and they embraced it with Windows Server 2003 Web Edition. The Apache and open source community also knows, but for some reason the choose to ignore it.
Additionally, with today's high power servers, a GUI isn't going to burn up enough CPU or "memory cycles" to cause any kind of noticeable lag. Windows 2003 has a constantly running GUI, so does Mac OSX Server. If a GUI is slowing down a system so much, then maybe the GUI is bloated or the operating system is poorly designed, but thats another topic.
You may be right, but not everyone is a professional, the amateur server admins are going to look for something easy. Not all business can afford a full time IT professional. Microsoft's success was built on making it easy for ANYONE.
I've seen those, and tried them. Comache is commercial and webmin is, well webmin. The rest are garbage.
We need something similar to OS X's GUI. Fedora has an Apache GUI that works somewhat decently, but unfortunately I found myself at many times going right to the text files due to the GUI being incomplete or buggy.
The reason is simple, IIS has a fully integrated and usable GUI to configure the server. As a server administrator, I do not want to bother dropping to a console and editing a text file. Even though (after some time) the Apache configuration files are simple to understand. When you need to do something quick, and you don't have time to stop, think, or plan, digging through a bunch of text files just doesn't cut it.
This is my only gripe with Apache, but I have to live with it since I would never touch IIS. MacOS X has a very good well integrated Apache configuration GUI, so it's not impossible to do it. I think the problem is the die hard console/text fanatics don't want to do it. I wish they would "get a clue", it's time to move on.
Webmin doesn't count, it's a web based GUI. Although it served me well, it's just too slow to use and at times can be very cryptic. Nothing can beat the power and speed of a native application.
If management is deeply hooked on Microsoft, they will never give up their precious "Microsoft Office Suite". No matter how much you try, and no matter how much better the open source product is compared to the proprietary stuff, it's impossible. Even when you have the two running side by side, and the Microsoft stuff is causing down time day after day while the open source products are running along smoothly.