Asp.net Vs. Php [Archive] - Oprano Adult Industry Forums

EricP

01-26-2003, 04:39 AM

Taken from: http://www.webmasterbase.com/article/871/18
http://www.webmasterbase.com/article/871
===========================================

6 Great Reasons to Use .NET

1. Speed

Just like all .NET applications, ASP.NET applications are compiled. This makes them much faster than PHP, whose applications are interpreted. To achieve the same effect with PHP, Zend and PHP accelerator must be installed on the server, and this is rarely the case at most Web hosting companies. Also, OO is much faster in ASP.NET than it is in PHP.

2. More Language Support

ASP.NET is written using "real" OO (Object Oriented) programming languages of your choice. PHP is just a simple scripting language in comparison to .NET languages like C++, VB.NET or C# -- languages that give you more control, and more reusability. That said, these languages are also harder to learn and master, and might be intimidating if you haven't been programming for very long. ASP.NET, for example, can't be picked up as easily as PHP, though C# is not very hard to learn if you already know PHP.

Another good thing about .NET is that it has multi-language support. You can currently write (or will be able to in the very near future) ASP.NET applications in C++, C#, Visual Basic.NET, Jscript.NET, Python, Perl, Java (J#), COBOL, Eiffel and Delphi. You may even find yourself writing your ASP.NET applications in PHP in the future -- it's not impossible!

What's nice about this is that you can mix the code. can instantiate an object in C# from a class written in C++ or VB.NET. This increases the programmer hiring pool for companies, and improves your chances of finding a suitable pre-written class for your project on the Web.

3. Your Choice of Development Environments

This is an area where ASP.NET shines!

Microsoft has released a free development environment for ASP.NET called Web Matrix, which blows all other free development environments for PHP out of the water. It has a built-in Web server, database administration interface FTP integration, and more. Not only that, Microsoft has also released MSDE -- a free development edition of MS SQL server. It has precisely all the features of the full MS SQL server 2000, and any application you write for MSDE will run fine on MS SQL Server.

If you can afford Visual Studio .NET, it, too, offers some amazing qualities. It allows you to:

automatically create reports and diagrams from your databases,
debug the code line by line, while at the same time seeing what happens in the application,
assign a temporary value to a variable in the middle of execution, in order to test out different scenario,
hover the cursor over variables in your code while debugging, to see what value they have "right now",

...and much more.

4. It's Part of .NET

ASP.NET is a part of .NET, and that benefit is too large to simply ignore. If you know how to write ASP.NET applications, you know how to write ordinary applications too. Even windows apps, if you read up a little on the Windows Forms classes (as opposed to the Web Forms). PHP has PHP-GTK, but it's currently very immature compared to .NET.

5. It's Cheaper to Develop for

Didn't expect that one, did ya? It even surprised me! Due to the fact that ASP.NET is such a powerful application, and it's offered for free (including the code editor, Web server, and FTP client), I actually ended up paying less ($0) than I did for my PHP Development Environment composed of UltraEdit ($35), Bullet Proof FTP ($30) and mySQLfront ($0). With that said, hosting ASP.NET is still more expensive than PHP.

6. It's Cross-Platform

.NET is currently pretty much tied to the Windows platform. This is a bad thing, but I'm quite confident that .NET will become very cross-platform in a few years. Why? A while back, Microsoft released Rotor, a Shared Source implementation of the CLR (CLR = The thing that runs code) and most of the non-windows specific class libraries for Windows and BSD Unix, with source code for both. When I first heard this, I didn't believe it -- that REALLY didn't sound like something Microsoft would do. And when I realized that it was in fact true, I expected Rotor to be the smallest and most feeble implementation Microsoft could possibly get away with.

I couldn't have been more wrong. Rotor hasn't been built on the cheap -- it's practically identical to its commercial counterpart in most important respects. .NET also has a very powerful Platform Abstraction Layer, making ports to other operating systems pretty easy to achieve. Not only that, but the CLI and C# are now standardized by ECMA. And the Mono project, with Ximian behind it, is working on an Open Source implementation of the .NET framework right now. All these factors lead me to believe that the chances for .NET to become cross-platform are very high.

Last edited by EricP at Jan 26 2003, 04:49 AM

JerryW

01-26-2003, 06:54 AM

1. Speed

Just like all .NET applications, ASP.NET applications are compiled. This makes them much faster than PHP, whose applications are interpreted. To achieve the same effect with PHP, Zend and PHP accelerator must be installed on the server, and this is rarely the case at most Web hosting companies. Also, OO is much faster in ASP.NET than it is in PHP.

Wrong. Zend (the php compiler) is installed by default in PHP 4. PHP accelerator and Zend Optimizer are both free and easy to install, and mosts hosts can do this. And given that most web applications are database driven and the performance are 99% related to the database, the speed of the OO is mute, assuming it's true (I've seen no benchmarks).

ASP.NET is written using "real" OO (Object Oriented) programming languages of your choice. PHP is just a simple scripting language in comparison to .NET languages like C++, VB.NET or C# -- languages that give you more control, and more reusability.

PHP 4 has very strong object orieted tools for reuse. Unless you're working on a major web application with a large team of programmers, the difference between PHP and the others is almost mute.

What's nice about this is that you can mix the code. can instantiate an object in C# from a class written in C++ or VB.NET. This increases the programmer hiring pool for companies, and improves your chances of finding a suitable pre-written class for your project on the Web.

PHP makes it very easy to attach C/C++ libraies and code to the PHP module. PHP has a huge numbers of 3rd party libraies that it can use for support ranging from Flash genearation to database drivers to zip file compression

4. It's Part of .NET

ASP.NET is a part of .NET, and that benefit is too large to simply ignore.

Given the security issues Microsoft has with it's software, I'm not sure how this is a benifit.

5. It's Cheaper to Develop for

Didn't expect that one, did ya? It even surprised me! Due to the fact that ASP.NET is such a powerful application, and it's offered for free (including the code editor, Web server, and FTP client), I actually ended up paying less ($0) than I did for my PHP Development Environment composed of UltraEdit ($35), Bullet Proof FTP ($30) and mySQLfront ($0). With that said, hosting ASP.NET is still more expensive than PHP.

$65 vs. $0, whoop-de-doo... Plus you can get free versions of good editors and ftp programs as well. I use ssh to the server and use vi, myself, like all real programmers :wnw:

6. It's Cross-Platform

.NET is currently pretty much tied to the Windows platform. This is a bad thing, but I'm quite confident that .NET will become very cross-platform in a few years.

The chances of Microsoft allowing .NET being cross-platform is about 0. Their whole business model is to get people to use Windows servers for all web applications.

Hooper

01-26-2003, 11:49 AM

.net cant be compared to php. php is a scripting language, .net as you said is an oo framework.

what .net can and should be compared to is java server solutions from sun. while i cant and wont try to make claim to all the points about the two systems...

<%

var microsoft.net = 1;
var sun.java = 1;

var current = microsoft.net

if(current =~ m/microsoft/){
$codered = 1;
$mssqlworm = 1;
}
else{
$codered = 0;
$mssqlworm = 0;
}

if($codered || $mssqlworm){
print "Your system will be hacked. And you will have down time."
}
else{
print "Keep processing signups without fear."
}
%>

JMHO :-)

Last edited by Hooper at Jan 26 2003, 11:58 AM

Darin

01-26-2003, 01:13 PM

.NET is an amazingly fast and powerfull platform. I look forward to seeing its acceptance over the next year.

RawAlex

01-26-2003, 01:45 PM

a free development edition of MS SQL server

Oh joy, more Microslop databases to get hacked and abused.

Sorry, the last one reminded me why nobody should use microslop on a server. It seems that exposing anything of theirs to the net is just a nice way to get hacked.

Alex

EricP

01-26-2003, 04:50 PM

Originally posted by RawAlex@Jan 26 2003, 01:53 PM
a free development edition of MS SQL server

Oh joy, more Microslop databases to get hacked and abused.

Sorry, the last one reminded me why nobody should use microslop on a server. It seems that exposing anything of theirs to the net is just a nice way to get hacked.

Alex
Microsoft released a patch for this on July 26, 2002.

This worm was caused by admin who do not update their systems properly.

EricP

01-26-2003, 04:51 PM

Originally posted by JerryW@Jan 26 2003, 07:02 AM
1. Speed

Just like all .NET applications, ASP.NET applications are compiled. This makes them much faster than PHP, whose applications are interpreted. To achieve the same effect with PHP, Zend and PHP accelerator must be installed on the server, and this is rarely the case at most Web hosting companies. Also, OO is much faster in ASP.NET than it is in PHP.

Wrong. Zend (the php compiler) is installed by default in PHP 4. PHP accelerator and Zend Optimizer are both free and easy to install, and mosts hosts can do this. And given that most web applications are database driven and the performance are 99% related to the database, the speed of the OO is mute, assuming it's true (I've seen no benchmarks).

ASP.NET is written using "real" OO (Object Oriented) programming languages of your choice. PHP is just a simple scripting language in comparison to .NET languages like C++, VB.NET or C# -- languages that give you more control, and more reusability.

PHP 4 has very strong object orieted tools for reuse. Unless you're working on a major web application with a large team of programmers, the difference between PHP and the others is almost mute.

What's nice about this is that you can mix the code. can instantiate an object in C# from a class written in C++ or VB.NET. This increases the programmer hiring pool for companies, and improves your chances of finding a suitable pre-written class for your project on the Web.

PHP makes it very easy to attach C/C++ libraies and code to the PHP module. PHP has a huge numbers of 3rd party libraies that it can use for support ranging from Flash genearation to database drivers to zip file compression

4. It's Part of .NET

ASP.NET is a part of .NET, and that benefit is too large to simply ignore.

Given the security issues Microsoft has with it's software, I'm not sure how this is a benifit.

5. It's Cheaper to Develop for

Didn't expect that one, did ya? It even surprised me! Due to the fact that ASP.NET is such a powerful application, and it's offered for free (including the code editor, Web server, and FTP client), I actually ended up paying less ($0) than I did for my PHP Development Environment composed of UltraEdit ($35), Bullet Proof FTP ($30) and mySQLfront ($0). With that said, hosting ASP.NET is still more expensive than PHP.

$65 vs. $0, whoop-de-doo... Plus you can get free versions of good editors and ftp programs as well. I use ssh to the server and use vi, myself, like all real programmers :wnw:

6. It's Cross-Platform

.NET is currently pretty much tied to the Windows platform. This is a bad thing, but I'm quite confident that .NET will become very cross-platform in a few years.

The chances of Microsoft allowing .NET being cross-platform is about 0. Their whole business model is to get people to use Windows servers for all web applications.
Do you work for Zend or something?

Just face it man, .NET kicks ass and MS makes you Cream!

:D

EricP

01-26-2003, 04:54 PM

Originally posted by Hooper@Jan 26 2003, 11:57 AM
.net cant be compared to php. php is a scripting language, .net as you said is an oo framework.

what .net can and should be compared to is java server solutions from sun. while i cant and wont try to make claim to all the points about the two systems...

<%

var microsoft.net = 1;
var sun.java = 1;

var current = microsoft.net

if(current =~ m/microsoft/){
$codered = 1;
$mssqlworm = 1;
}
else{
$codered = 0;
$mssqlworm = 0;
}

if($codered || $mssqlworm){
print "Your system will be hacked. And you will have down time."
}
else{
print "Keep processing signups without fear."
}
%>

JMHO :-)
Hoop,

If you can only afford to hire 2nd rate sys admin who do not know how to update a server or apply a patch, you will have problem.

EricP

01-26-2003, 04:59 PM

Originally posted by Darin@Jan 26 2003, 01:21 PM
.NET is an amazingly fast and powerfull platform. I look forward to seeing its acceptance over the next year.
Darin,

What amazes me is how little people know about what it can really do.

Most fools spout off comments without even reading (http://VBasic.NET) up on .NET first.

It amazes me.

Last edited by EricP at Jan 26 2003, 05:08 PM

Mike AI

01-26-2003, 04:59 PM

Eric, PHP / Apache / Unix are industry standards for a reason. Not only in this industry, but also otehr huge online industires.

Yahoo is regearing to be 100% PHP based - infact they have the guy who created PHP on staff.

Also USANetworks who owns expedia and some huge dating properties are about to covert their entire operations and programing to PHP. THis is a decision their blue ribbon panel came up with the past month.

These are billion dollar companies on the Internet. These guys ( as well as porn guys) can afford the best, most robust technology in the world.... and they all go to the same place....

and it ain't microsoft!

EricP

01-26-2003, 05:09 PM

Eric, PHP / Apache / Unix are industry standards for a reason. Not only in this industry, but also otehr huge online industires.

Standards (http://VBasic.NET) are broken. Just ask some of the local Feed providers around here.

Yahoo is regearing to be 100% PHP based - infact they have the guy who created PHP on staff.

Also USANetworks who owns expedia and some huge dating properties are about to covert their entire operations and programing to PHP. THis is a decision their blue ribbon panel came up with the past month.

Mike, I could name dozens of large sites that use MS Servers (http://VBasic.NET).
Have you EVER seen microsoft.com down?

These are billion dollar companies on the Internet. These guys ( as well as porn guys) can afford the best, most robust technology in the world.... and they all go to the same place....

and it ain't microsoft!

Mike (http://VBasic.NET),

Most people (http://VBasic.NET) have no idea what MS and .NET can do for them. It's much more than just a simple .php page can do.

Last edited by EricP at Jan 26 2003, 05:17 PM

Mike AI

01-26-2003, 05:16 PM

Eric Microsoft is a giant, of course you will have people use them.... ltos of people.

But EVERYONE I know, and the people I deal with, all look to non-microsfot solutions....

I have talked to some BRILLIANT programers, the staff at DirectNIC, and not one person pushed microsoft. Inact, you are the only person I know how pushes microsoft so much. I also think this is because you are not familiar with other options out side of Microsoft...

EricP

01-26-2003, 05:26 PM

That's okay Mike.

I may not be an 'Old School' Programmer....but I am staying one step ahead of the game.

I have talked to some BRILLIANT programers, the staff at DirectNIC, and not one person pushed microsoft.

Um, maybe becuase they have always used C/PHP programmers?
Maybe becuase they do not run Windows Servers?

I also think this is because you are not familiar with other options out side of Microsoft...

Mike, I use PHP and MySQL a lot (Have I not built some solid PHP/MySQL Web Apps?)....but when it comes to Windows Programming it would be stupid to use any other option than .NET. Tie your Windows app to your Web App and you have a solid solution.

I also think this is because you are not familiar with other options out side of Microsoft...

I can also say that every C/PHP programmer is not familiar with .NET.

It's easy to say isn't it?

EricP

01-26-2003, 05:38 PM

Mike,

Times are changing....

It may be hard to accecpt, but it's happening.

:biglaugh:

Mike AI

01-26-2003, 05:51 PM

Eric latest headlines about potential incoming attack Monday

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/2696131.stm

The worm known as SQL ("sequel") Slammer targeted a known weakness in Microsoft's software to shut down powerful server computers around the world and can knock websites

You may think you are ahead of the game, and gambling on the side of Microsoft has been a historically smart thing to do, in this case I think its a bad bet.

Microsoft cannot even get their bread and butter to work right - desktop software. 98, 2000, XP .....

I have to think the programers I know are pretty cutting edge....

Just because they are not microsoft lackeys does not mean they are not cutting edge....

EricP

01-26-2003, 06:03 PM

Originally posted by Mike AI@Jan 26 2003, 05:59 PM
Just because they are not microsoft lackeys does not mean they are not cutting edge....
Well, Theres a lot of lackeys gambling on .NET

.Net may top list of job skills in demand (http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1104-978922.html)

.Net
Significantly, .Net skills are appearing on the must-have list alongside Java and XML. Hull University is developing--with Microsoft--the first .Net Post Graduate Degree course for Computer Science in the UK, beginning in September 2003. As part of the Microsoft Developer Network Academic Alliance, universities create a "lending library" where students can legally access copies of the products for home use.

Last edited by EricP at Jan 26 2003, 06:14 PM

Hooper

01-26-2003, 06:09 PM

Eric,

I dont understand why you still havent responded to my comment.

You are comparing the wrong two items. ".net" and "php" is like comparing "iis" and "perl". They dont perform the same functions and are not supposed to.

What you need to be comparing if you wish to compare open source to microsoft proprietary is two technologies that are supposed to do the same thing.

Comparing how fast your dog can run against my vcr isnt a practical comparison to make to start with. If microsoft makes the dog and php makes the vcr OF COURSE the dog is going to win the race.

.NET is essentially a rip off of the java platform. Object oriented, network aware programming, fast as shit, secure etc..etc..etc..

Not saying whether you are right or wrong, but watching you compare .net to php is silly. .net is a platform, asp tends to be the language that is used for scripting on the .net platform php is also just a language that is used for scripting.

.net = development platform
java = development platform

asp = scripting language
jsp = scripting language

you HAVE to compare the correct items to eachother, otherwise the discussion isnt even worth reading, much less responding to.

Last edited by Hooper at Jan 26 2003, 06:19 PM

EricP

01-26-2003, 06:10 PM

The worm known as SQL ("sequel") Slammer targeted a known weakness in Microsoft's software to shut down powerful server computers around the world and can knock websites

Yeah, I guess we need to find a way to idiot proof the servers.

If System Admin would have updated their systems last JULY like Microsoft told them too, this would not have happened.

EricP

01-26-2003, 06:12 PM

Originally posted by Hooper@Jan 26 2003, 06:17 PM
Eric,

I dont understand why you still havent responded to my comment.

You are comparing the wrong two items. ".net" and "php" is like comparing "iis" and "perl". They dont perform the same functions and are not supposed to.

What you need to be comparing if you wish to compare open source to microsoft proprietary is two technologies that are supposed to do the same thing.

Comparing how fast your dog can run against my vcr isnt a practical comparison to make to start with. If microsoft makes the dog and php makes the vcr OF COURSE the dog is going to win the race.

.NET is essentially a rip off of the java platform. Object oriented, network aware programming, fast as shit, secure etc..etc..etc..

Not saying whether you are right or wrong, but watching you compare .net to php is silly. .net is a platform, asp tends to be the language that is used for scripting on the .net platform php is also just a language that is used for scripting.

.net = development platform
java = development platform

asp = scripting language
jsp = scripting language

you HAVE to compare the correct items to eachother, otherwise the discussion isnt even worth reading, much less responding to.
Hoop,

I compaired the speed of ASP.NET and PHP and YES they do the same thing...display data in a web page.

EricP

01-26-2003, 06:14 PM

Originally posted by Hooper@Jan 26 2003, 06:17 PM
Eric,

I dont understand why you still havent responded to my comment.

You are comparing the wrong two items. ".net" and "php" is like comparing "iis" and "perl". They dont perform the same functions and are not supposed to.

What you need to be comparing if you wish to compare open source to microsoft proprietary is two technologies that are supposed to do the same thing.

Comparing how fast your dog can run against my vcr isnt a practical comparison to make to start with. If microsoft makes the dog and php makes the vcr OF COURSE the dog is going to win the race.

.NET is essentially a rip off of the java platform. Object oriented, network aware programming, fast as shit, secure etc..etc..etc..

Not saying whether you are right or wrong, but watching you compare .net to php is silly. .net is a platform, asp tends to be the language that is used for scripting on the .net platform php is also just a language that is used for scripting.

.net = development platform
java = development platform

asp = scripting language
jsp = scripting language

you HAVE to compare the correct items to eachother, otherwise the discussion isnt even worth reading, much less responding to.
What the hell was this Topic Title?

ASP.NET VS. PHP

Hooper

01-26-2003, 06:23 PM

Eric, I'm not going to piss with you. I have to take my wife out to dinner.

Buuutttttttttt....

saying that asp .net and php do the same thing is kinda likes saying that my monitor and my television do the same thing.

asp is NOT .net, ASP is a scripting language and can be run independent of the .net platform, in fact, ASP can be run on unix platforms as well!

PHP is not apache, php is not sun, php is not perl, php is a scripting language that tends to be run on unix/linux distros with apache. php however CAN be run on the .net windows platform just as easily as it can be run on the *nix platform.

What i was trying to do was educate you because you are showing your ignorance by simply quoting something you've read. You are comparing the wrong two items. You cant compare asp running under a .net framework to php because you arent specifying WHAT framework php is running under. Is it php on a windows machine with a .net framework? Is it php running on a unix machine with apache? Is it asp on a unix machine?

And yes, the end result may be the same, but that doesnt mean that you can compare notepad to asp running on .net just because both can be used to make web pages.

I'm going to start a thread called "eric's television with superbowl versus my boat" and let you argue about whether the tv is better than the boat or vice versa.

Argh. I have to go. This is the kind of stupidity that leads people to the Microsoft platform in the beginning. Simple lack of understanding.

EricP

01-26-2003, 06:41 PM

http://www.middleware-company.com/j2eedotnetbench/

Java J2EE vs .NET

.NET Smokes em!

EricP

01-26-2003, 06:43 PM

Originally posted by Hooper@Jan 26 2003, 06:31 PM
Eric, I'm not going to piss with you. I have to take my wife out to dinner.

Buuutttttttttt....

saying that asp .net and php do the same thing is kinda likes saying that my monitor and my television do the same thing.

asp is NOT .net, ASP is a scripting language and can be run independent of the .net platform, in fact, ASP can be run on unix platforms as well!

PHP is not apache, php is not sun, php is not perl, php is a scripting language that tends to be run on unix/linux distros with apache. php however CAN be run on the .net windows platform just as easily as it can be run on the *nix platform.

What i was trying to do was educate you because you are showing your ignorance by simply quoting something you've read. You are comparing the wrong two items. You cant compare asp running under a .net framework to php because you arent specifying WHAT framework php is running under. Is it php on a windows machine with a .net framework? Is it php running on a unix machine with apache? Is it asp on a unix machine?

And yes, the end result may be the same, but that doesnt mean that you can compare notepad to asp running on .net just because both can be used to make web pages.

I'm going to start a thread called "eric's television with superbowl versus my boat" and let you argue about whether the tv is better than the boat or vice versa.

Argh. I have to go. This is the kind of stupidity that leads people to the Microsoft platform in the beginning. Simple lack of understanding.

Hooper,

ASP.NET is a language of its own and is part of the .NET Framework.

Get it?

ASP.NET is a NEW Language....not just ASP under the .NET Framework.

Do some reading first!

Last edited by EricP at Jan 26 2003, 06:56 PM

EricP

01-26-2003, 06:55 PM

Originally posted by Hooper@Jan 26 2003, 06:31 PM
Eric, I'm not going to piss with you. I have to take my wife out to dinner.

Buuutttttttttt....

saying that asp .net and php do the same thing is kinda likes saying that my monitor and my television do the same thing.

asp is NOT .net, ASP is a scripting language and can be run independent of the .net platform, in fact, ASP can be run on unix platforms as well!

PHP is not apache, php is not sun, php is not perl, php is a scripting language that tends to be run on unix/linux distros with apache. php however CAN be run on the .net windows platform just as easily as it can be run on the *nix platform.

What i was trying to do was educate you because you are showing your ignorance by simply quoting something you've read. You are comparing the wrong two items. You cant compare asp running under a .net framework to php because you arent specifying WHAT framework php is running under. Is it php on a windows machine with a .net framework? Is it php running on a unix machine with apache? Is it asp on a unix machine?

And yes, the end result may be the same, but that doesnt mean that you can compare notepad to asp running on .net just because both can be used to make web pages.

I'm going to start a thread called "eric's television with superbowl versus my boat" and let you argue about whether the tv is better than the boat or vice versa.

Argh. I have to go. This is the kind of stupidity that leads people to the Microsoft platform in the beginning. Simple lack of understanding.
ASP.NET is a set of technologies in the Microsoft .NET Framework for building Web applications and XML Web Services. ASP.NET pages execute on the server and generate markup such as HTML, WML or XML that is sent to a desktop or mobile browser. ASP.NET pages use a compiled, event-driven programming model that improves performance and enables the separation of application logic and user interface. ASP.NET pages and ASP.NET XML Web Services files contain server-side logic (as opposed to client side logic) written in Visual Basic .NET, C# .NET, or any .NET compatible language. Web applications and XML Web Services take advantage of the features of the common language runtime, such as type safety, inheritance, language interoperability, versioning, and integrated security.

http://msdn.microsoft.com/nhp/Default.asp?...0440&frame=true (http://msdn.microsoft.com/nhp/Default.asp?contentid=28000440&frame=true)

EricP

01-26-2003, 07:01 PM

You cant compare asp running under a .net framework to php because you arent specifying WHAT framework php is running under.

Again, I want to stress....ASP.NET is Nothing like regular ASP.

ASP.NET is NOT regular ASP running under the .NET Framework.

They are totally different.

EricP

01-26-2003, 07:04 PM

What i was trying to do was educate you because you are showing your ignorance by simply quoting something you've read.

Umm, Hoop...

I'm not sure what you have read, but you totally missed what ASP.NET is.

EricP

01-26-2003, 07:09 PM

This is the kind of stupidity that leads people to the Microsoft platform in the beginning. Simple lack of understanding.

I think that should have read:

"Stupidity and lack of understanding is what leads people to not use the Microsoft platform. Simple lack of understanding."

EricP

01-26-2003, 07:14 PM

What i was trying to do was educate you because you are showing your ignorance by simply quoting something you've read. You are comparing the wrong two items. You cant compare asp running under a .net framework to php because you arent specifying WHAT framework php is running under. Is it php on a windows machine with a .net framework? Is it php running on a unix machine with apache? Is it asp on a unix machine?

Hooper, you try to make yourself look so smart, but you just proved to me that you have no idea what you are talking about when it comes to .NET.

ASP.NET is a NEW language with all NEW syntax.

http://www.asp.net/whitepaper/whyaspnet.aspx

Last edited by EricP at Jan 26 2003, 07:34 PM

RawAlex

01-26-2003, 07:28 PM

Eric, all of this is nice, except you miss the most important part of ths discussion:

Windows NT (or XP) has alot of things running on an IIS server that are not needed directly for serving content. That includes the GUI interface of windows, the windows logon security system, and thousands of other little snippets of code and crap that have NOTHING to do with serving webpages - and have everything to do with using up system resources. IIS / NT just doesn't run well under load, when compared to the unix/apache combo.

The hole slammer used is a known one, but I can tell you, based on the number of updates I keep having to do to XP, I assume there are a pile of undiscovered bugs out there in microsoft stuff just waiting to be exploited.

Sorry, web servers don't have a GUI interface. Until microslop gets that idea clear, you are going to have bloatware with security holes... web serving is a simple straight forward thing... IIS/NT is just too complicated to do this right at any large scale.

As for ASP.NET, it doesn't matter - it runs on an underperforming platform, and as such, isn't going to set the world on fire until the underslying problems are fixed.

Oh yeah, I forgot: Microslop was caught not a year ago running unix/apache servers on some of their sites rather than IIS. it was funny to get an error page with apache on it.

Back to the game.

Alex

EricP

01-26-2003, 07:35 PM

Java J2EE vs .NET?

http://www.vbasic.net/temp/j2ee.jpg

http://www.middleware-company.com/document...etbenchmark.pdf (http://www.middleware-company.com/documents/j2eedotnetbenchmark.pdf)

EricP

01-26-2003, 07:43 PM

Originally posted by RawAlex@Jan 26 2003, 07:36 PM
Eric, all of this is nice, except you miss the most important part of ths discussion:

That includes the GUI interface of windows, the windows logon security system, and thousands of other little snippets of code and crap that have NOTHING to do with serving webpages - and have everything to do with using up system resources. IIS / NT just doesn't run well under load, when compared to the unix/apache combo.

The hole slammer used is a known one, but I can tell you, based on the number of updates I keep having to do to XP, I assume there are a pile of undiscovered bugs out there in microsoft stuff just waiting to be exploited.

Sorry, web servers don't have a GUI interface. Until microslop gets that idea clear, you are going to have bloatware with security holes... web serving is a simple straight forward thing... IIS/NT is just too complicated to do this right at any large scale.

As for ASP.NET, it doesn't matter - it runs on an underperforming platform, and as such, isn't going to set the world on fire until the underslying problems are fixed.

Oh yeah, I forgot: Microslop was caught not a year ago running unix/apache servers on some of their sites rather than IIS. it was funny to get an error page with apache on it.

Back to the game.

Alex

Hi Alex,

Windows NT (or XP) has alot of things running on an IIS server that are not needed directly for serving content.

Umm, First Windows NT is very old. That term is not used much anymore.
IIS comes with an SMTP mail Server and an FTP Server. You specify if you want these installed during setup of IIS. Personally I use Windows 2000. I really didn't care for XP.

A Windows Server is MUCH, MUCH more than just a simple Web Server.

You are right there.

There are a ton of things you can do with a Windows Server.

I AGREE that if all you need is a Web Server and a Database....stick with Linux, PHP and MySQL.

Last edited by EricP at Jan 26 2003, 07:51 PM

Hooper

01-26-2003, 07:48 PM

aah. apparently i misunderstood what exactly you were talking about.

Hooper, you try to make yourself look so smart, but you just proved to me that you have no idea what you are talking about when it comes to .NET.

I am smart enough to have never been hit by a single MS exploit.

It seems that it would be a common mistake to think that you were referring to ASP aka the language that has been around for many years itself.

Either way. fuck off.

Last edited by Hooper at Jan 26 2003, 08:00 PM

EricP

01-26-2003, 07:53 PM

Hooper,

I chatted with you in Vegas and you seemed like a very nice guy.

No need to say 'Fuck Off.'

This is just a debate on programming languages.

Last edited by EricP at Jan 26 2003, 08:02 PM

RawAlex

01-26-2003, 08:05 PM

Eric, this is the porn business. We serve content.

Compare something that people use...

Link site running on PHP / apache / unix

link site running on IIS / ASP / Windows whatever

Put a half million visitors a day through the front page.

End of discussion.

Alex

Mike AI

01-26-2003, 08:07 PM

Alex, you might as well give up.... Eric is one of Bill Gates secret clones... bent on taking over world for MS. :D

Debating him over Microsoft is like :headwall:

EricP

01-26-2003, 08:14 PM

Originally posted by RawAlex@Jan 26 2003, 08:13 PM
Eric, this is the porn business. We serve content.

Compare something that people use...

Link site running on PHP / apache / unix

link site running on IIS / ASP / Windows whatever

Put a half million visitors a day through the front page.

End of discussion.

Alex
Hi Alex,

I completly agree.

BUT I am thinking about the future of content delivery. I am building apps on .NET that do MUCH more than just server a link list.

I would love to test that theory of yours. I should have a new .NET enabled Server up in a few weeks. We can run a couple benchmarks of our own :)

It will be interesting to see the results!

Are you talking about a dynamic linklist from a database or static?

RawAlex

01-26-2003, 08:22 PM

Mike, I suspect so... but you know, Mr Piss into the wind at times... :headwall:

Eric, 100% dynamic.

rotating links, say 5000 items, no pre-sorts or prefabed pages...

What you will find is what every major test of microsoft servers have found: They keep up with unix / apache servers until a point, then they flatline VERY quickly... literally max out. After that, pages get served so slowly that things come to a halt.

Any product is good in light duty work... few are able to handle the huge volumes that really make the world go around.

Alex

EricP

01-26-2003, 08:26 PM

Originally posted by RawAlex@Jan 26 2003, 08:30 PM
Mike, I suspect so... but you know, Mr Piss into the wind at times... :headwall:

Eric, 100% dynamic.

rotating links, say 5000 items, no pre-sorts or prefabed pages...

What you will find is what every major test of microsoft servers have found: They keep up with unix / apache servers until a point, then they flatline VERY quickly... literally max out. After that, pages get served so slowly that things come to a halt.

Any product is good in light duty work... few are able to handle the huge volumes that really make the world go around.

Alex
Hi Alex,

I have not seen any benchmarks against MySQL/PHP/Linux and SQL Server/ASP.NET/Windows Server.

You may be right. I have no clue.

I have been thinking of ways I can test this though. Im really not sure how I can.

Any ideas on how I can test this withought taking 500,000 hits from MikeAI?!

:)

EricP

01-27-2003, 12:21 AM

Okay, I found some really neat load testing tools.

And No, they are not all made my MS.

After I get this new Server up and running, I will put it to the test.

http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?...QA/loadtest.asp (http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=/support/dna/bundles/QA/loadtest.asp)

GreyLurk

01-27-2003, 04:41 PM

Mike, I could name dozens of large sites that use MS Servers (http://VBasic.NET).
Have you EVER seen microsoft.com down?

Actually, yes, quite frequently.

Also, microsoft's website doesn't function correctly under the majority of browsers. I just spent 2 hours on the phone with MSN's tech support trying to download the MSN 8 software, and they couldn't tell me why their web page wouldn't show up in my browser.

Mike (http://VBasic.NET),

Most people (http://VBasic.NET) have no idea what MS and .NET can do for them. It's much more than just a simple .php page can do.

The big advantage of PHP and UNIX that I see is the huge availability of resources and programmers. If you look on the job boards, there are hundreds of companies hiring ASP people, and only two or three hiring UNIX folks. The ASP postings stay up for weeks, whereas the UNIX postings are taken down within a few days. Do you know why? because nobody can find anyone who develops in ASP.

Microsoft Development environments hide too much from you, their debuging systems don't work, they crash constantly, slowing development cycles and frustrating developers.

In order to develop a simple page you first have to build yourself a class library, because the .NET library adresses a lot of very in-depth and interesting stuff, but fails to adress many of the basic, simple tasks that a web application developer needs. I spent 3 weeks trying to learn ASP.net at one point, and simply gave up in frustration. By comparison, it took me 3 weeks to go from barely knowing the PHP library to coding robust object oriented portal systems using XML-RPC and SOAP.

EricP

01-27-2003, 05:27 PM

Microsoft Development environments hide too much from you, their debuging systems don't work, they crash constantly, slowing development cycles and frustrating developers.

And this coming from someone who gave up trying to understand MS programming after 3 weeks?

:rolleyes:

EricP

01-27-2003, 05:30 PM

The big advantage of PHP and UNIX that I see is the huge availability of resources and programmers. If you look on the job boards, there are hundreds of companies hiring ASP people, and only two or three hiring UNIX folks. The ASP postings stay up for weeks, whereas the UNIX postings are taken down within a few days. Do you know why? because nobody can find anyone who develops in ASP.

Um, this my programming friend is a Big Plus.

Being able to always get a job is a GOOD thing.

EricP

01-27-2003, 05:36 PM

So for all of you programmers out there...

What I think he is saying is...

"If you want to learn a challenging language that will allow you to do much more that PHP, AND be in HIGH DEMAND....learn .NET."

:D

EricP

01-27-2003, 06:14 PM

..but fails to adress many of the basic, simple tasks that a web application developer needs

The .NET Framework is very, very Powerful.

There are a lot of classes to use. (Over 3400)

You just have to study the .NET Framework (http://msdn.microsoft.com/netframework/).

EricP

01-27-2003, 06:19 PM

Good places to start:

http://www.gotdotnet.com/team/framework/default.aspx

http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default....etframework.asp (http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/cpguide/html/cpconinsidenetframework.asp)

http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default....cpref_start.asp (http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/cpref/html/cpref_start.asp)

Hell Puppy

01-27-2003, 09:28 PM

Me thinks someone may have had a few glasses of Redmond KoolAid!

PHP is better compared to ASP. If you wanna talk ASP.net, you should really be comparing J2EE to be apples to apples.

However, in adult, Unix, PHP and Perl are very firmly entrenched. There are very few applications in adult where it makes sense to spend the additional development overhead necessary to use EITHER asp.net or J2EE. And that is before you even consider things like whether your host is capable of supporting and SECURING a Microsoft server.

But here's my real issue with .net. .NET is a product. J2EE is a standard. Want some middleware? With .NET, there's exactly one vendor...Microsoft. With J2EE there are over 30...

voodooman

01-27-2003, 10:04 PM

Well, Microsoft is really pushing this .NET software.

I just seen 5 ads for it on tv in the last 2 commercial breaks.

EricP,

How much is Microsoft paying you?

:nyanya:

EricP

01-27-2003, 10:33 PM

Originally posted by voodooman@Jan 27 2003, 10:12 PM
Well, Microsoft is really pushing this .NET software.

I just seen 5 ads for it on tv in the last 2 commercial breaks.

EricP,

How much is Microsoft paying you?

:nyanya:
Longterm?

Maybe Millions.

Dravyk

01-28-2003, 03:42 AM

And this from the same great people who fucked up the Net over the weekend with their seven month late and still fucked up MySQL patch!!!

.... Oh yeah, baby: Microshit and the Internet, they go together like a Hasidic assembly at a pig roast!!

The day Gates can figure out how to do a fully-functinal smooth-operating Hotmail without Linux is the day I might believe they are starting to get a clue.

01-28-2003, 04:57 AM

Sorry but running serious applications on Microsoft platforms vs. any flavor of *nix is *generally*:

a) not cost effective
b) less reliable
c) more difficult to maintain

The .NET technology might be great. The only problem is that it relies on insecure and unstable MS OS technology..

MS works great on the desktop, but servers are another story

Last edited by KC at Jan 28 2003, 05:10 AM

EricP

01-28-2003, 10:07 AM

Originally posted by Dravyk@Jan 28 2003, 03:50 AM
And this from the same great people who fucked up the Net over the weekend with their seven month late and still fucked up MySQL patch!!!

.... Oh yeah, baby: Microshit and the Internet, they go together like a Hasidic assembly at a pig roast!!

The day Gates can figure out how to do a fully-functinal smooth-operating Hotmail without Linux is the day I might believe they are starting to get a clue.
Dravyk,

Really man... you should not speak too loudly about things you know nothing about.

1. Microsoft released a patch for the worm last July.
2. Umm...Do you know the difference between MYSQL and SQL Server? Guess Not.
3. Blah, Blah, Blah.

EricP

01-28-2003, 10:09 AM

Originally posted by KC@Jan 28 2003, 05:05 AM
The .NET technology might be great. The only problem is that it relies on insecure and unstable MS OS technology..
I guess you haven't tried Windows Server 2003 have you?
Or 2000 for that matter.

EricP

01-28-2003, 10:26 AM

Originally posted by KC@Jan 28 2003, 05:05 AM
Sorry but running serious applications on Microsoft platforms vs. any flavor of *nix is *generally*:

a) not cost effective
B) less reliable
c) more difficult to maintain
I completly disagree.

ulfie

01-28-2003, 01:16 PM

The MS databases are the weakest links. All our apps we used to write we used an IBM AS/400 for the database server. You could hack the NT server but all you could do was screw around with some html and asp code. AS/400's are extremely difficult to hack into which is why the pentagon uses them. Another dirty little secret that Microsoft doesn't want people to know is that they ran their business on IBM AS/400's until a few years ago because they knew their own security was so poor.

EricP

01-28-2003, 01:21 PM

Originally posted by ulfie@Jan 28 2003, 01:24 PM
The MS databases are the weakest links. All our apps we used to write we used an IBM AS/400 for the database server. You could hack the NT server but all you could do was screw around with some html and asp code. AS/400's are extremely difficult to hack into which is why the pentagon uses them. Another dirty little secret that Microsoft doesn't want people to know is that they ran their business on IBM AS/400's until a few years ago because they knew their own security was so poor.
Ulife,

Tell me...

Have you developed any apps with MS SQL Server/Windows Server 2000 or 2003? How did that go? Who programmed the app? Who admin the server? Did they use the right tools to lock the server down?

Also, have you looked around webmaster resource sites that have always been very Pro PHP and have you noticed that they all love .NET? (www.sitepoint.com is one)

How much research have you done on MS security?

EricP

01-28-2003, 01:25 PM

Another dirty little secret that Microsoft doesn't want people to know is that they ran their business on IBM AS/400's until a few years ago because they knew their own security was so poor.

Interesting. Who knew? :yowsa:

Can you post the article that you read this at? I'm sure it's creditable....so no fear. B)

EricP

01-28-2003, 01:26 PM

I will put up a Server and will pay $100.00 an ANYONE who can hack it.

No questions asked.

If you are interested, please post here and we will work out the details right here on this board.

EricP

01-28-2003, 01:27 PM

Yes, a Windows Server.

RawAlex

01-28-2003, 01:30 PM

http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/biztech/01/28...ap/index.htmluj (http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/biztech/01/28/microsoft.worm.ap/index.htmluj)

'nuff said.

Alex

EricP

01-28-2003, 01:36 PM

Originally posted by RawAlex@Jan 28 2003, 01:38 PM
http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/biztech/01/28...ap/index.htmluj (http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/biztech/01/28/microsoft.worm.ap/index.htmluj)

'nuff said.

Alex
Yes, they should have caught that hole long ago in development.
Yes, the admin should have installed the patches.

SQL Server was written in unmanaged code that easily allowed buffer overflows.

.NET provides a whole new realm of security and a much more secure way to code.

Do some Research on this people.

01-28-2003, 01:37 PM

Originally posted by EricP@Jan 28 2003, 01:34 PM
I will put up a Server and will pay $100.00 an ANYONE who can hack it.

No questions asked.

If you are interested, please post here and we will work out the details right here on this board.
Make it $10K.. no firewall and I'll hire someone to hack it.

EricP

01-28-2003, 01:38 PM

Originally posted by EricP+Jan 26 2003, 05:07 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (EricP @ Jan 26 2003, 05:07 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin--Darin@Jan 26 2003, 01:21 PM
.NET is an amazingly fast and powerfull platform. I look forward to seeing its acceptance over the next year.
Darin,

What amazes me is how little people know about what it can really do.

Most fools spout off comments without even reading (http://VBasic.NET) up on .NET first.

It amazes me.[/b][/quote]
My thought still stands.

If you guys would read a bit about the inner workings of .NET, you would not be spouting all these comments.

EricP

01-28-2003, 01:39 PM

Originally posted by KC+Jan 28 2003, 01:45 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (KC @ Jan 28 2003, 01:45 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin--EricP@Jan 28 2003, 01:34 PM
I will put up a Server and will pay $100.00 an ANYONE who can hack it.

No questions asked.

If you are interested, please post here and we will work out the details right here on this board.
Make it $10K.. no firewall and I'll hire someone to hack it.[/b][/quote]
hahaha....

A firewall is a must have.

It is a large part of locking down a system.

01-28-2003, 01:39 PM

Originally posted by EricP@Jan 28 2003, 01:44 PM
Yes, they should have caught that hole long ago in development.
Yes, the admin should have installed the patches.
I thought the patch they released last year didn't even work.

I know admins who updated their patches on Friday and still got screwed when that started.

Bottom line, windows servers don't belong on the internet.. they should be confined to little corporate networks.

01-28-2003, 01:42 PM

Originally posted by EricP@Jan 28 2003, 01:47 PM
A firewall is a must have.

It is a large part of locking down a system.
How do you test how strong a system's security is if you do a test behind a firewall? sounds like a network security test.

The systems should be able to stand on their own.

Which would get hacked first on an open network. A well configured FreeBSD box or a well configured windows 2000 box? How long would it take to configure each platform?

FreeBSD = 30 minutes?
Win 2000 = 3 Days?

EricP

01-28-2003, 01:43 PM

Originally posted by KC+Jan 28 2003, 01:47 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (KC @ Jan 28 2003, 01:47 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin--EricP@Jan 28 2003, 01:44 PM
Yes, they should have caught that hole long ago in development.
Yes, the admin should have installed the patches.
I thought the patch they released last year didn't even work.

I know admins who updated their patches on Friday and still got screwed when that started.

Bottom line, windows servers don't belong on the internet.. they should be confined to little corporate networks.[/b][/quote]
KC,

Again you are spouting off with little or no facts.

This is foolish to debate this with you when you have done no research on .NET.

01-28-2003, 01:44 PM

Originally posted by EricP@Jan 28 2003, 10:17 AM
I guess you haven't tried Windows Server 2003 have you?
Or 2000 for that matter.
Actually I use Win 2000 for my desktop and laptop OS..

but the last time I put a windows server on my network it was compromised and used in a DDoS attack against a company that sued us. We spent $50K and about 3 months on a lawsuit defending ourselves over a stupid Windowz box.

01-28-2003, 01:46 PM

Originally posted by EricP@Jan 28 2003, 01:51 PM
This is foolish to debate this with you when you have done no research on .NET.
.NET runs on a MS OS right? Therefore a discussion about OS reliability and security is reasonable.

Mike AI

01-28-2003, 01:48 PM

Actually I use Win 2000 for my desktop and laptop OS..

but the last time I put a windows server on my network it was compromised and used in a DDoS attack against a company that sued us. We spent $50K and about 3 months on a lawsuit defending ourselves over a stupid Windowz box.

KC I remembered when this happened.... :( :angry:

01-28-2003, 01:49 PM

It was a long weekend.. for sure. :(

Dianna Vesta

01-28-2003, 01:50 PM

Originally posted by Mike AI@Jan 26 2003, 05:24 PM

But EVERYONE I know, and the people I deal with, all look to non-microsfot solutions....

I have talked to some BRILLIANT programers, the staff at DirectNIC, and not one person pushed microsoft. Inact, you are the only person I know how pushes microsoft so much. I also think this is because you are not familiar with other options out side of Microsoft...
I am not a programmer but a business owner who replies on programmers and solutions. I agree with Mike. Industry standards pull a lot of weight, while MS past and recent events make you go, "Hmmmm".

You could pay me to do Windows Server anything much less trust my business beyond my personal PC, Win XP - to Microsoft.

News is news and talk is talk at this point.

01-28-2003, 02:03 PM

Originally posted by ulfie@Jan 28 2003, 01:24 PM
Another dirty little secret that Microsoft doesn't want people to know is that they ran their business on IBM AS/400's until a few years ago because they knew their own security was so poor.
Additionally, when MS bought hotmail.com.. they attempted to convert it from FreeBSD & Apache to NT and IIS.. but NT couldn't handle the load and they switched back to the *nix solution..

Eric,

Do you know any sites that are in the top 20 (in terms of traffic) that use MS technology? It's not a platform for serious traffic. In the adult industry, the traffic loads are different that little MS Consulting firms and stuff.

EricP

01-28-2003, 02:45 PM

Originally posted by KC+Jan 28 2003, 01:50 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (KC @ Jan 28 2003, 01:50 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin--EricP@Jan 28 2003, 01:47 PM
A firewall is a must have.

It is a large part of locking down a system.
How do you test how strong a system's security is if you do a test behind a firewall? sounds like a network security test.

The systems should be able to stand on their own.

Which would get hacked first on an open network. A well configured FreeBSD box or a well configured windows 2000 box? How long would it take to configure each platform?

FreeBSD = 30 minutes?
Win 2000 = 3 Days?[/b][/quote]
Thats fine KC. No Firewall.

How long would it take to configure each platform?

Me? About 2 hours.

EricP

01-28-2003, 02:47 PM

Originally posted by KC@Jan 28 2003, 02:11 PM
[QUOTE=ulfie,Jan 28 2003, 01:24 PM]
Eric,

Do you know any sites that are in the top 20 (in terms of traffic) that use MS technology? It's not a platform for serious traffic. In the adult industry, the traffic loads are different that little MS Consulting firms and stuff.
Thats right,

http://www.nasdaq.com and MS all get trickle traffic.

Puuullleezzz.

01-28-2003, 02:53 PM

Originally posted by EricP@Jan 28 2003, 02:55 PM
[QUOTE=ulfie,Jan 28 2003, 01:24 PM]
Eric,

Do you know any sites that are in the top 20 (in terms of traffic) that use MS technology? It's not a platform for serious traffic. In the adult industry, the traffic loads are different that little MS Consulting firms and stuff.
Thats right,

http://www.nasdaq.com and MS all get trickle traffic.

Puuullleezzz.
Nasdaq is a top 20 site?

how about any sites that MS doesn't own?

Why is it that Microsoft Disciples believe MS is the best for every situation? Isn't it just exhausting to defned MS all the time?

Mike AI

01-28-2003, 02:58 PM

I doubt http://www.nasdaq.com is in top 20 sites on the net.

And I thin microsoft is listed with them, thus they are trying to use technology of their clients.

RawAlex

01-28-2003, 03:07 PM

KC, problem is Eric drnak the kool-aid, and got a BIG dose.

Eric, when you discuss a microsoft product such as .net, you have to remember that you end up with the whole ball of microslop wax. You get the windows, and .net runs mostly on the sql server, so there ya go. You also eat up all that overhead making a nice gui display for the console, and the overhead that is windows running, even at idle. Critical system resources (ram and processor cycles) are wasted doing all the things you don't need to run a server. More importantly, from a security standpoint, literally thousands of ports are open on the TCP/IP that don't need to be, and they answer...

you like .net, that's fine. Enjoy it. Do something with it, and then come back and show us how smart you are. We aren't in the business of theoreticals, were are in the business of high volume porn serving...

Heck, if your are right, then you have a big jump on the rest of us and you will be rich!

:rokk:

Alex

RawAlex

01-28-2003, 03:08 PM

Top 20 (alot of korean sites...) according to alexa.com:

#1
Web Site Yahoo!
Provides intuitive, context-based guides to online content, Web search capabilities, third-party content and community and personalization features which enable Web users to locate and access desired information and services. (Nasdaq: YHOO).
www.yahoo.com

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. MSN.com
Microsoft's Internet portal. Offers personalized content, with search, news, stocks, email, weather and access to other Microsoft content channels including MSNBC, Carpoint, Expedia (travel) and more.
www.msn.com

3. 다음daum
A very popular South Korean portal. Offers search, news, finance, entertainment, and other portal features.
www.daum.net

4. 네이버
통합 검색과 디렉토리, 웹페이지, 해외사이트, 멀티미디어, 뉴스 검색을 지원하는 검색 포털.
www.naver.com

5. Google
Enables users to search the Web, Usenet, and images. Features include PageRank, caching and translation of results, and an option to find similar pages. The company's focus is developing search technology.
www.google.com

6. Alexa Internet
Please note: The traffic ranking for alexa.com is inflated because users of the Alexa Toolbar are disproportionately likely to visit our site. Alexa provides great search results plus free information about sites.
www.alexa.com

7. Passport.net
www.passport.net

8. Yahoo! JAPAN
掲示板、オークションなどの参加型コンテンツがあるディレクトリ。
www.yahoo.co.jp

9. Sayclub.com
www.sayclub.com

10. Microsoft Corporation
Designs, develops, manufactures, licenses, sells and supports a wide range of software products. (Nasdaq: MSFT).
www.microsoft.com

11. E-Bay
Buy and sell stamps and related items.
www.ebay.com

12. Bugsmusic.co.kr
www.bugsmusic.co.kr

13. Sina北京新浪网
位于北京的新闻中心，包括新闻与评论。
www.sina.com.cn

14. 넷마블
즐거운 게임세상 배틀가로세로 퀴즈마블 워드크래프트 워드워 워드빙고 최강헥사 최강테트리스 파워 알까기(장기) 파워 알까기(바둑) 바 둑 장 기 오 목 따 목 상 목 고스톱 섯 다 세븐포커 슬롯머신
www.netmarble.net

15. Sohu.com Inc.
Produces Chinese language Internet portal and internet communities. (Nasdaq: SOHU).
www.sohu.com

16. Amazon.com
Retails electronics, books, CDs, toys, DVDs, kitchen items, software, tools, games, and much, much more.
www.amazon.com

17. 网易
提供虚拟社区和电邮服务。
www.163.com

18. 드림위즈
꿈이 이루어지는 인터넷 DreamWiz !!
www.dreamwiz.com

19. Gator.com
Gator free eWallet download fills in online forms.
www.gator.com

20. 프리챌
현실사회의 공동체를 사이버에서 더욱 발전시켜 갈 수 있도록 하는 커뮤니티 전문 인터넷 서비스
www.freechal.com

01-28-2003, 03:15 PM

Originally posted by RawAlex@Jan 28 2003, 03:16 PM
Top 20 (alot of korean sites...) according to alexa.com:

I'm throwing a script together that will check the top 100 sites.. (based on Alexa)..

I should have the tallys in about 20 mins.. :)

EricP

01-28-2003, 04:21 PM

KC....pull your panties out of your ass! :)

Why is it that Microsoft Disciples believe MS is the best for every situation?

I never said that.

In fact, I said above that if all you need is a database and webserver, stick with *nix, mysql, and php.

98% of the servers I work with are *nix and that is fine with me.

I would not put a lot of porn sites on a MS Server, nor have I ever said I wanted to. There is just no need for that.

I am talking about enterprise solutions and enterprise data engines.

I build MS solutions at home, in my spare time. At work, I build on *nix platforms with PHP.

If you think that is what I was implying, we need to back up and start again.

The topic of this discussion was ASP.NET, not running your porn sites on Windows Server.

RawAlex

01-28-2003, 04:25 PM

EricP: Ummm, porn board, porn solutions.

Alex

EricP

01-28-2003, 04:28 PM

Originally posted by RawAlex@Jan 28 2003, 03:15 PM
KC, problem is Eric drnak the kool-aid, and got a BIG dose.
I have read about .NET, and have studied the .NET Framework.

If you would do the same, you would realize the power it offers is above and beyond anything that has ever been.

C# is much better than C++.

VB 6 was trash, VB.NET is a full OO language will all the power of C++ and C#.

ASP was simple and could only do so much, with ASP.NET you can do SO much more and you can use ANY .NET compatiable language including C++, C#, Visual Basic.NET, Jscript.NET, Python, Perl, Java (J#), COBOL, Eiffel and Delphi.

EricP

01-28-2003, 04:30 PM

Originally posted by RawAlex@Jan 28 2003, 04:33 PM
EricP: Ummm, porn board, porn solutions.

Alex
Yes, I am building solutions for the Adult Industry...but I would not put a lot of adult 'Member' sites on a Windows Server.

There is no need.

Hooper

01-28-2003, 04:31 PM

I will put up a Server and will pay $100.00 an ANYONE who can hack it.

"hack it" means what? get administrative access? get a copy of the registry?

or just bring it to it's knees? :matey:

EricP

01-28-2003, 04:34 PM

Originally posted by Hooper@Jan 28 2003, 04:39 PM
I will put up a Server and will pay $100.00 an ANYONE who can hack it.

"hack it" means what? get administrative access? get a copy of the registry?

or just bring it to it's knees? :matey:
haha Hoop...

No dos attacks :)

Getting a file I put in the C dir would work.

Hooper

01-28-2003, 05:40 PM

Sounds like a fun challenge, but you cant do something like start it up and have NO services running.

You have to run the services that a windows box runs. FTP, Telnet, IIS, Windows Media perhaps, PC Anywhere or VNC, whichever you use to admin the box.. i'll be game for at lease a little bit of fun :-)

ulfie

01-28-2003, 06:21 PM

Hack an IBM AS/400 and I'll be impressed. There's a reason all the casino's use them. .NET is nice technology, I'm just not as sold on it as you are Eric due to Microsofts track record.

EricP

01-28-2003, 07:13 PM

Ulife, I COMPLETLY understand your point, But...

As far as the security issues are concerned, a large majority of MS security cases are caused from inexperienced admin who do not follow MS Security Recommendations properly, thus the reason Microsoft put out such free software as;

The " v4 Windows Update (http://v4.windowsupdate.microsoft.com/en/default.asp) " The latest version that updates your system or network automatically.

The " Baseline Security Analyzer (http://www.microsoft.com/technet/treeview/default.asp?url=/technet/security/tools/Tools/MBSAhome.asp) " that will probe your entire system (or Network) and tell you how to fix security vulnerabilities. (Works on Desktops too - XP, 2000) Give it a try. It also has a great user interface.

The " IIS Lockdown Tool (http://www.microsoft.com/technet/treeview/default.asp?url=/technet/security/tools/tools/locktool.asp) " that locks down IIS from well known mis-configurations that could allow a breach in security.

If very well paid 'system admin' were as smart as their 4 year computer degree says they are, they would be using the tools above to help secure a W2K Server.

With the release of Windows Server 2003 and SQL Server (Yukon), I think we will see a very large improvement in security.

MS has made it their 1# priority and a very large part of it starts with .NET.

http://www.gotdotnet.com/team/clr/about_security.aspx

http://www.microsoft.com/mscorp/execmail/default.asp
...In early 2002 we took the unprecedented step of stopping the development work of 8,500 Windows engineers while the company conducted 10 weeks of intensive security training and analyzed the Windows code base...

http://www.microsoft.com/security/

Last edited by EricP at Jan 28 2003, 07:44 PM

EricP

01-28-2003, 07:34 PM

I know MS does not have the greatest security record, but take a look at the above post. Read what they are doing and I'm sure you will see that they are giving it 110% when it comes to security.

2003 - 2004 will be a very good test of this.

ulfie

01-28-2003, 08:21 PM

Originally posted by EricP@Jan 28 2003, 07:42 PM
I know MS does not have the greatest security record, but take a look at the above post. Read what they are doing and I'm sure you will see that they are giving it 110% when it comes to security.

2003 - 2004 will be a very good test of this.
This begs the question "why weren't they giving security their full attention until now?" Like I said before I'll wait and see. From my standpoint I would have a hard time trusting Microsoft with my business until they have proven they can handle it. So far they haven't.

EricP

01-28-2003, 08:57 PM

Originally posted by ulfie+Jan 28 2003, 08:29 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (ulfie @ Jan 28 2003, 08:29 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin--EricP@Jan 28 2003, 07:42 PM
I know MS does not have the greatest security record, but take a look at the above post. Read what they are doing and I'm sure you will see that they are giving it 110% when it comes to security.

2003 - 2004 will be a very good test of this.
This begs the question "why weren't they giving security their full attention until now?" Like I said before I'll wait and see. From my standpoint I would have a hard time trusting Microsoft with my business until they have proven they can handle it. So far they haven't.[/b][/quote]

ulfie,

I guess you didn't read those links eh?

Last edited by EricP at Jan 28 2003, 09:06 PM

DAMNMAN

01-29-2003, 12:37 AM

Originally posted by ulfie@Jan 28 2003, 01:24 PM
The MS databases are the weakest links. All our apps we used to write we used an IBM AS/400 for the database server. You could hack the NT server but all you could do was screw around with some html and asp code. AS/400's are extremely difficult to hack into which is why the pentagon uses them. Another dirty little secret that Microsoft doesn't want people to know is that they ran their business on IBM AS/400's until a few years ago because they knew their own security was so poor.
I used to work with an AS/400 using Lotus Notes Domino.

Awesome box shitty webserver the webserver crashed 5 times a day.
I also hate Lotus: I've been to school for it and I will never work in that environment again I hate it that bad.

Que

01-29-2003, 04:11 AM

taken from : http://www.netcraft.com/
only 3 in the top ten and only 6 MS sites in the top 20... come on!

#1
www.yahoo.com
The site www.yahoo.com is running unknown on FreeBSD.

2. MSN.com
www.msn.com
The site www.msn.com is running Microsoft-IIS/5.0 on Windows 2000

3. ??daum
www.daum.net
The site www.daum.net is running Apache on Linux

4. ???
www.naver.com
The site www.naver.com is running Apache/1.3.26 (Unix) on Solaris

5. Google
www.google.com
The site www.google.com is running GWS/2.0 on Linux

6. Alexa Internet
www.alexa.com
The site www.alexa.com is running Apache Tomcat/4.0.1 (HTTP/1.1 Connector) on Linux

7. Passport.net
www.passport.net
The site www.passport.net is running Microsoft-IIS/5.0 on Windows 2000

8. Yahoo! JAPAN
www.yahoo.co.jp
The site www.yahoo.co.jp is running unknown on FreeBSD

9. Sayclub.com
www.sayclub.com
The site www.sayclub.com is running Apache/1.3.26 (Unix) mod_ssl/2.8.9 OpenSSL/0.9.6g on FreeBSD

10. Microsoft Corporation
www.microsoft.com
The site www.microsoft.com is running Microsoft-IIS/6.0 on Windows Server 2003

11. E-Bay
www.ebay.com
The site www.ebay.com is running Microsoft-IIS/4.0 on NT4/Windows 98

12. Bugsmusic.co.kr
www.bugsmusic.co.kr
The site www.bugsmusic.co.kr is running Microsoft-IIS/5.0 on unknown.

13. Sina?????
www.sina.com.cn
The site www.sina.com.cn is running Apache/2.0.43 (Unix) on FreeBSD

14. ???
www.netmarble.net
The site www.netmarble.net is running Microsoft-IIS/5.0 on Windows 2000.

15. Sohu.com Inc.
www.sohu.com
The site www.sohu.com is running Apache/1.3.26 (Unix) mod_gzip/1.3.19.1a on unknown

16. Amazon.com
www.amazon.com
The site www.amazon.com is running Stronghold/2.4.2 Apache/1.3.6 C2NetEU/2412 (Unix) on Linux.

17. ??
www.163.com
The site www.163.com is running Apache/1.3.26 (Unix) on FreeBSD

18. ????
www.dreamwiz.com
The site www.dreamwiz.com is running Apache/1.3.26 (Unix) on FreeBSD.

19. Gator.com
www.gator.com
The site www.gator.com is running Apache/1.3.26 (Unix) Debian GNU/Linux PHP/4.1.2 mod_perl/1.26 on Linux.

20. ???
www.freechal.com
The site www.freechal.com is running Microsoft-IIS/5.0 on Windows 2000.

Que

01-29-2003, 04:16 AM

oh and for thouse of you that don't like to reboot your servers...
http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/today/top.avg.html

note how the first MS box is number 25!
sorry but I like to have a system that WORKS! what can I say...

Que

01-29-2003, 04:21 AM

of interest as well...
http://www.netcraft.com/survey/

EricP

01-29-2003, 04:43 AM

http://www.netcraft.com/survey/

www.byteandswitch.com has been running continuously since November 2000. When we first started graphing web servers uptime in the summer of 2000, many people were skeptical that a Windows machine would ever make the top 50. Perceptions change, and although two years is exceptional, several Windows 2000 sites have run for more than a year without a reboot. In the hosting industry, Microsoft partners Interliant and Divine each have sites that have not been rebooted in over a year, while Microsoft has also run several of its own sites for over a year between reboots.

Hummm, Interesting.

Last edited by EricP at Jan 29 2003, 04:54 AM

EricP

01-29-2003, 04:54 AM

Originally posted by Que@Jan 29 2003, 04:24 AM
oh and for thouse of you that don't like to reboot your servers...
http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/today/top.avg.html

note how the first MS box is number 25!
sorry but I like to have a system that WORKS! what can I say...

Which sites are routinely surveyed ?

Initially a small set of sites were surveyed, but we are now increasing this set. Any site that is requested through the what's that site running query form at Netcraft.com will be automatically added to the set of sites that are routinely sampled. If you have already done this you do not need to e-mail us. Once we have collected sufficient daily samples, we will be able to plot an uptime graph for the site.

Once we have monitored the host for sufficient time to plot a graph, we will only continue to monitor the host if it is again requested through the site. We cannot routinely monitor all 22 million hosts that we know of for performance reasons.

You dork.

EricP

01-29-2003, 05:03 AM

http://linuxworldexpo.com/

http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph?site=l...uxworldexpo.com (http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph?site=linuxworldexpo.com)

They went from Apache/Linux to Windows :)

Classic.

Last edited by EricP at Jan 29 2003, 05:19 AM

EricP

01-29-2003, 05:09 AM

Originally posted by Que@Jan 29 2003, 04:24 AM
note how the first MS box is number 25!
http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph?site=2...Redisplay+Graph (http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph?site=209.189.115.26&mode_u=on&mode_w=on&avg_days=360&submit=Redisplay+Graph)

Umm, almost 3 years without a reboot on a Windows box?

Impressive.

EricP

01-29-2003, 05:18 AM

Originally posted by Que@Jan 29 2003, 04:24 AM
oh and for thouse of you that don't like to reboot your servers...
http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/today/top.avg.html

note how the first MS box is number 25!
sorry but I like to have a system that WORKS! what can I say...
It's crap like this that pisses me off.

People coming here with bits of truth and 1/2 cocked facts.

http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/accuracy.html#whichsites

Initially a small set of sites were surveyed, but we are now increasing this set. Any site that is requested through the what's that site running query form at Netcraft.com will be automatically added to the set of sites that are routinely sampled. If you have already done this you do not need to e-mail us. Once we have collected sufficient daily samples, we will be able to plot an uptime graph for the site.

Once we have monitored the host for sufficient time to plot a graph, we will only continue to monitor the host if it is again requested through the site. We cannot routinely monitor all 22 million hosts that we know of for performance reasons.

Que

01-29-2003, 05:22 AM

Originally posted by EricP@Jan 29 2003, 02:17 AM
Umm, almost 3 years without a reboot on a Windows box?

Impressive.
yes it is quite impressive, and some what out of the ordinary...
but is just standard fair when it comes to apache / *nux combo

EricP

01-29-2003, 05:24 AM

Originally posted by Que@Jan 29 2003, 04:19 AM
taken from : http://www.netcraft.com/
only 3 in the top ten and only 6 MS sites in the top 20... come on!
Umm...Come on what?

Around 30% of Servers are Windows.

Did you expect more or something?

Que

01-29-2003, 05:38 AM

I am saying that you have yet to make anything close to a valid argument as to why any one in this industry would move from a secure, stable, working envirement to microshit...

yes MS has about 30% of online servers, and that has not really changed significantly in the past 3 years...

EricP

01-29-2003, 05:58 AM

Originally posted by Que@Jan 29 2003, 05:46 AM
I am saying that you have yet to make anything close to a valid argument as to why any one in this industry would move from a secure, stable, working envirement to microshit...

yes MS has about 30% of online servers, and that has not really changed significantly in the past 3 years...
Que,

I am not saying anyone in adult should use it, nor am I saying it would be better or faster for serving porn. (Read my past posts to understand what I am getting at.)

Microsoft had a vision that they started with Windows NT (Beta) and have fullfilled in a very powerful way with .NET and Windows Server 2003 (Release).

It took them close to 10 years and over 8500 skilled programmers to develop this software and it is more powerful than anything most have ever seen. (Think about that for a moment)

If you would read and do a little research you will see that Windows Server 2003 and .NET programming is far superior than anything that has ever been released.

It's a whole new enviroment. More secure, more stable, just plain superior.

I think if you did a little reading and testing, you will see that MS is not what it used to be.

You can start your reading at www.microsoft.com