Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

Re: asp.net

__/ [ BearItAll ] on Thursday 23 February 2006 10:24 \__

> A few days ago in a thread .NET was mentioned, and I must say I quite like
> the idea of .NET, as I said in that thread though after quite a small
> project, just to try it for real, I couldn't see an enormous benefit over
> php or rubyrails, but it certainly has merit, particularly the new version
> 2. Then put that together with a free IDE and you could have quite a nifty
> design platform. (though I was intending to my own IDE on linux simply
> because when there is a need for speed you are always better off with the
> developement environment you are used to, that intellisense stuff is good
> for training and tutorials but in real life just gets in the way).
> Fate likes his little jokes, because just a couple of days later I am given
> a job doing an interface using it. They want it hosted on MS NT so that
> they can use exactly the same code internally on thier own server. (of
> cause I could of still used php, but I want to have a proper go at asp.net
> anyway.
> So I went shopping for a host. After looking at the very few that host
> version 2 at this time (though it does seem to be spreading, for just a
> little extra cost) and rejecting their silly prices, I looked more
> generaly.

There is a subtle catch to beware of. Minimalist hosting packages -- those
which startups would often opt for -- can be as cheap as Linux equivalents.
But much as in Oracle, there is a lock-in involved and if you later grow,
you must then pay the price. Big time. The upgrade of Vista, which involves
unlocking of features, is a different-yet-somewhat-similar scenario.

> It is a great deal more expensive than the Linux hosts. Many options that
> you might think of as 'standard hosting services' are charged for on just
> about every .net host I looked at. Even a database, you pay so much per
> megabyte per month, the cheapest I saw was for $1 per meg per month. For
> test purposes that sounds tiny, but for an interface that covers many
> branches of a company, many users and reasonably large database, then you
> can very quickly end up paying a great deal in annual hosting costs.

Would you believe that you must pay to analyse and view your *statistics*?
Well, take that as a warning. I see people whose hosting plan is Windows.
They whine in the forums because all it ever involves are pay-per-feature
iterations. *Basic* features.

> My own favourite host and the one I generally reccomend is ocssolutions,
> you can simply login through your console then work in the same was as you
> do on your own Linux. You have all that you would expect to find, direct
> database access, php, rubyrails, perl etc.
> This was the first time I had looked closely at what MS hosts offer,
> basically they all offer the same with only tiny variations, including the
> same 'built in' applications that many of them claim are their own. Would I
> be right in thinking these are  things that load out of the box when they
> buy MS 200x server, a sort of carrot that was meant to encourage them to do
> simmilar applications of their own? Some were asking for more money if you
> wanted php or perl, I didn't see any offering ruby but then I am not sure
> if that has had great success on MS machines.
> The only one that stood out as offering more for your money was webfusion.
> They are well known as a good UNIX/Linux host too of cause, very good as a
> host for home or company use.

My Web host is doing both Windows and Linux. Downtime of mail (and possibly
Web server too) seems to be worse for Windows despite the fact that more
people appear to be working on it.

> Even though MS has given users a free developement platform for asp.net,
> the hosting is still likely to be out of the reach of the school boy. Never
> go by the entry level on these host sites, although they might say 'asp'
> none of those I looked at offered asp.net at entry level and many didn't
> allow scripting at all until you went for one of the more expensive hosting
> packages. So Linux must still be the prefered route for the younger people
> wanting to web programming.

The same arguments apply to general development -- that which is not
necessarily associated with the Web.

Best wishes,


Roy S. Schestowitz      |    Useless fact: Florida is bigger than England
http://Schestowitz.com  |    SuSE Linux     |     PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
 12:50pm  up 6 days  1:09,  8 users,  load average: 0.34, 0.34, 0.27
      http://iuron.com - Open Source knowledge engine project

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index