|
|
| GeoCommunity Mailing List |
| |
| Mailing List Archives |
| Subject: | RE: GISList: Automatic data recording |
| Date: |
07/01/2003 04:25:01 PM |
| From: |
Allan Doyle |
|
|
On Tuesday, July 01 2003 at 13:47:19(-0700) Dimitri Rotow wrote:
>
> > >
> > ------
> > Everyone involved in cgi programming/server-side services actualy knows
> > a serious drawback pf asp - it is still poorly suitable for heavily used
> > services. If you have hundreds of hits per second on your site then your
> > asp starts "idling". Actualy speed difference for the identical
> > algorithm written in asp and some other "older" server programming
> > languages like PHP or Perl is usualy about ~60 times (asp is slower).
>
> Nonsense. If anything, CGI scripting is usually, but not always, slower
> than .asp.
Take a look at
http://www.perlmonth.com/perlmonth/issue4/benchmarks.html
If you don't like those benchmarks, maybe you can show us yours.
>
> > And if you are going to use it under windows environment, you are going
> > to have serious problems with it. Not to mention windows and IIS related
> > security problems. Windows world is nice until you smash into serious
> > efficiency and security issues.
>
> More nonsense. Windows from 2000 onwards and *especially* recent releases
> like Windows Server 2003 are *extremely* efficient, reliable and highly
> secure. Yes, it is true that there are more security reports for Windows
> than for Linux, but that's because more people use Windows, by a factor of
> 100 to 1. For web sites, many more commercial users utilize Windows and
This is a non-sequitor. The number of different reported flaws has
nothing to do with the number of instances running.
> Windows has vastly more web applications running under it. Note that
> although Linux advocates are fond of stating that very many websites run on
> Linux, what they don't say is that most of those are irrelevant, "one
> person" websites involving trivial HTTP service that receive nearly zero
> visitors and for which security does not matter. The great majority of
> websites on which money changes hands run on Windows and IIS, as do most
> serious commercial websites for which security is a factor.
Go to www.netcraft.com - type in the website of your choice. I picked
these. I think I've mentioned before that you guys use Apache on Unix
for your front page. Now I notice that you also use PHP. Good stuff, eh?
www.manifold.net - Apache Unix PHP 4.3.0
www.ibm.com - Apache Unix.
www.whitehouse.gov - Apache Linux
www.fidelity.com - Netscape-Enterprise Solaris
www.citibank.com - Solaris
www.direct.com - Apache Unix (my credit union)
>
> > While learning some php, perl (perl_mod incl.) is not too hard if you
> > are already involved in GIS or any kind of professional computing (many
>
> I agree it is not difficult. But there are many things that are not so
> difficult to learn, such as making one's one shoes, that people who place a
> reasonable economic value on their time do not undertake. Instead, they buy
> their shoes pre-made. Note also that most people don't hire a consultant to
> make their shoes for them when they can easily buy them off the shelf.
Tsk, tsk. I hope you get that message through to the management at
Manifold.
>
> I agree that if you have a hobby interest in programming, you might enjoy
> that even though it is not an economically sensible activity, just as some
> people who have a hobby interest in leatherwork might make their own sandals
> and find that more gratifying than buying off the shelf. But again, that is
> not most people.
>
> To repeat, most people running sophisticated software want to use pre-built
> tools to get the job done without programming themselves or hiring
> developers to write custom applications. Suggesting that it is economically
> sensible to program one's own application solutions using "free" software
> (when "paid" software can do the job without programming) only makes
> economic sense if the programmer's time is nearly worthless [which raises
> the important managerial question... who in their right minds thinks it is a
> wise management practise to populate an organization with nearly worthless
> programmers?].
I guess you don't worry about ticking off the PHP programmers in your
company who keep your website running. I'm glad I don't work for you!
>
> If you can acquire a sophisticated, inexpensive application that does what
> you need without programming that makes a lot more sense. I agree that if
> you *cannot* do what you need to do with a pre-built application than, of
> course, it makes sense to look at all possibilities. After all, I work for
> an organization that makes a lot of money when people hire them to d
|
|
Sponsored by:
For information
regarding
advertising rates
Click Here!
|
