Re: Apache vs IIS
- From: Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2008 16:30:42 -0500
Lars wrote:
Se the replies far below.
"Jerry Stuckle" <jstucklex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> skrev i meddelandet news:ZYSdnWQD1dAtplHanZ2dnUVZ_ommnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxLars wrote:"Jerry Stuckle" <jstucklex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> skrev i meddelandet news:_pmdnXpHsuUDnFHanZ2dnUVZ_vfinZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxASP does have sessions - but don't know about .NET.Lars wrote:Haven't used ASP.NET or ASP before so I couldn't tell if that was included earlier. What I can tell is that ASP.NET has simlified web creating. ASP.NET takes care of the connection to databases. You use the database as you would do in Visual Basic, Delphi, Kylix or what ever ordinario programming tool you are using."Jerry Stuckle" <jstucklex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> skrev i meddelandet news:BPadnd-tbPk-qVbanZ2dnUVZ_vCknZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxAh, they're finally catching up with that PHP, Perl, Java, etc. have been doing for years.Lars wrote:From what I have read and been told ASP.NET has the ability to tell how to manage SESSION cockies for a particular site. I know you can set this up in Apache but I recall that is for the entire webserver. By using SESSION cockies in ASP.NET you can save a lot of processing on the server. For example when you make a PostBack for a page and want to set some date to change the view you should not redownload the date from the database again. This can be set up in the web.config file. As I understand not all PostBacks has to go via the server. I haven't got the hang of it yet. I've only programmed ASP.NET for a month 2-4 hours a day. But so far I'm very satisfied how easy it is to build web based database systems with ASP.NET."Jerry Stuckle" <jstucklex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> skrev i meddelandet news:AtOdnWceDePSWFXanZ2dnUVZ_jGdnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxLet's take two similar VPS's I have. One is Windows - it has 512MB of RAM (which is exceeded rather regularly, requiring paging) and a 10GB hard drive (of which > 6GB is used before even loading the web sites).Lars wrote:Well that's as good reason as any one. Yes ASP.NET takes some system resources. But if you design a large system the monley spend in time saving is greater than what you save to run the system on a cheaper machine.HiI've done some ASP.NET. Thanks anyway. I'll stick with PHP and Apache on Linux. Cheaper and more efficient use of system resources. ASP.NET is a huge resource hog - like all MS products.
"J.O. Aho" <user@xxxxxxxxxxx> skrev i meddelandet news:62rcg9F23tji5U1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxeclipsme wrote:PHP on a IIS server is rather easy to run once you install PHP on a PC but if you only use PHP why not use Apache for Windows. If you plan to use IIS then I ASP.NET and a database on the homepage then IIS is a good suggestion. I haven't tried PHP on IIS since I can use ASP.NET. The old version of ASP is pretty similar to PHP. As I recall the use of PHP started to grow when ASP was introduces. The syntax of the two languages is different. With ASP.NET not only do you write C# or VB script for your homepages you can also add WebControls as you can't do with PHP. When you use PHP you have to check $_GET, $_POST or $_SESSION arrays for fetching user data. ASP.NET is more used as a WISYWIG tool. Add a control let's say a button for a form to the aspx page then double click the button and you end up where you can write the code.Lars wrote:You can run asp on Apache server, and you can do that even on an Apache running on a Linux server. It's a bit more tricky to install Apache+asp on Linux than iis+asp on microsoft.Apache vs IIS? I haven't got ASP.NET to work on Apache niether on my Windows Server not on my Linux Server so there for I would chose IIS. Not that Apache is bad but ASP.NET is far easier and faster to create good web forms in.IIS is designed for ASP, or rather visa versa. I don't think you can run asp on Apache, but I could be wrong.
I am just hoping somebody can say "look here" for the differences in running php from IIS vs Apache. I guess it won't be so easy, though...It's easier to say what could be wrong if seen the code and your iis settings.
Lars
--
//Aho
There is one MS product I DON'T like and that's The MS Antispyware Program. It removes all spyware except the biggest spyware of them all "MSN Serach and WIndows Messanger". MS Antispyware program where probably only written and released to get rid of all competition for Microsoft MSN Search.
When it comes to programming tools I like Borlands tools better. As you might know Delphi is also available for Linux under the name Kylix.
Lars
The other is running on Debian Linux, with 128Mb RAM (exceeded occasionally) and 5GB hard drive (about 2.3 GB used before loading web sites).
Processors are similar on the systems, and the sites get about the same percentage of load. Both have similar sites with similar requirements and load. One is mostly ASP, the other entirely PHP. And both run similarly quickly, although the Windows box typically runs a higher CPU percentage than the Unix one does.
And before someone comments on the fact these are vps's - I also have test systems set up on dedicated servers for development. The results there are similar to that on the VPS's, although of course I have to simulate loads, since they aren't directly on the internet.
--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstucklex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
==================
What's a VPS? Obvioulsy some thing common that I recall as soon as some one explains.
Lars
ASP.NET does have session and very easy. It's build in in one of the .NET classes.
From what I understand every thing in ASP is included in ASP.NET.
I find sessions in PHP quite easy to use. No classes necessary - although if I needed one, I could write one in a few minutes.
BTW
.NET doesn't have to be the same as ASP.NET. I doubt ordinary .NET applications (executables) includes the session array.
From the server side ASP.NET generates HTML with JAve scripts back to the server. If you browse a ASP.NET page check the source code and see for your self. YOu could say that ASP.NET is a way to simplify writing of Java Scripts. For example when you create a menu in ASP.NET you do in in a WISYWIG tool that generates a Java menu back to the user.OK, so? I've never had a problem writing javascript, and found much of the generated code is not that great.
It would be fair to compare PHP with ordinary ASP. The are basicly the same. But ASP.NET is a whole new way of develping programs. It's a platform upon the OS or Web Brower or what ever you are using. You could say microsofts RESPONCE to Java. ANd as always Microsoft have to do things their own way.Yes, it's a platform based on IIS and IE. Whereas PHP and Perl are platforms for any OS and any web server. And why reinvent the wheel (other than to control the world)? Java is an excellent platform and has lots of support from multiple manufacturers. And it doesn't require Windows.
Check out the mono project a project to port ASP.NET to Linux and Apache.
Yep, I'm familiar with it. A decent implementation, I admit. However, like all ports, it will always be behind in new features. Not that's necessarily bad when it comes to Microsoft software, I admit.
BTWVirtual Private Server - basically a shared server, but you have your own OS, root (Administrator in Windows) access, etc. You can do pretty much anything with it you can do with a dedicated server, but it's much cheaper.
What was VPS.
Lars
As I said probably some thing I know of but doesn't know the shortence for. Such a server I have at my ISP for both my commersial Internet pages. I'm also looking to move one of the sites to a VPS provider that supports ASP.NET.
Thanks
Lars
--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstucklex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
==================
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Apache vs IIS
- From: J.O. Aho
- Re: Apache vs IIS
- From: Lars
- Re: Apache vs IIS
- References:
- Re: Apache vs IIS
- From: Lars
- Re: Apache vs IIS
- From: Jerry Stuckle
- Re: Apache vs IIS
- From: Lars
- Re: Apache vs IIS
- From: Jerry Stuckle
- Re: Apache vs IIS
- From: Lars
- Re: Apache vs IIS
- From: Jerry Stuckle
- Re: Apache vs IIS
- From: Lars
- Re: Apache vs IIS
- From: Jerry Stuckle
- Re: Apache vs IIS
- From: Lars
- Re: Apache vs IIS
- Prev by Date: Re: Apache vs IIS
- Next by Date: Re: Apache vs IIS
- Previous by thread: Re: Apache vs IIS
- Next by thread: Re: Apache vs IIS
- Index(es):