Interesting Netcraft results...

[funkywhat2]

Anyone here seen anything interesting as to what some sites run when they're on the Netcraft page, etc...

I didn't think that MacMall would run on outdside servers, let alone IIS servers. That's not to dis MacMall or anything, I have to give them props on some of their deals, but you think that a company would try to show faith in what they sell by using it.

And, finally, something has come out of everyone's favorite fictional enterprise product- .NET! Apparently, windowsupdate.com uses it!

MacMall results- http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph/?mode_u=on&mode_w=on&site=www.macmall.com&submit=Examine

Windows Update results-
http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph/?mode_u=on&mode_w=on&site=www.windowsupdate.com&submit=Examine

Netcraft- http://www.netcraft.com

 

[MacCoaster]

Re: Interesting Netcraft results...

Originally posted by crazy_will
I didn't think that MacMall would run on outdside servers, let alone IIS servers. That's not to dis MacMall or anything, I have to give them props on some of their deals, but you think that a company would try to show faith in what they sell by using it.

You know there is PC Mall? That's the company's official name. Go to About Us page on Mac Mall. Their original name was Creative Computing, Inc., founded in 1987.

Besides, Macs suck for serious serving. It's better left to clusters of high end x86 boxes (either Windows or any x86 version of Unices), IBM Servers, Sun servers, etc. to run enterprise solutions. Leave Mac on the desktop, that is where it shines.

And, finally, something has come out of everyone's favorite fictional enterprise product- .NET! Apparently, windowsupdate.com uses it!

Oh my god?! Really! Oh wait, WindowsUpdate.com is owned by Microsoft Corporation.

What fictional product? .NET is very real. Microsoft and others have already adopted .NET solutions for enterprise purposes. It has been proven very robust for several solutions.

Besides, the entire Microsoft website network is run on a cluster of 60 Windows .NET Server RC1 servers already [edit: at least the entire microsoft.com one, the rest are either Windows 2000 or FreeBSD, using .NET technologies and Web Services].

 

[funkywhat2]

Wow! Thought the big joke all of two months ago was the .NET wasn't real because it wasn't being used for anything - just advertised. And even that has been unsucessful so far (I think). Wasn't there talk some month(s) ago that Microsoft was going to kill of .NET? And you know, all those PC makers are just jumping on the .NET bandwagon!

As to your other comment - the Apple page is done on OS X Server, and that's a pig site,is it not? There are plenty of other sites that get served using OS X Server - as well as being served with earlier versions of MacOS.

I knew that they were owned by PC Mall. I didn't know that the original name of the company was Creative Computing. I was just pointing out that if your going to sell something - regardless of what your parent company uses - you should use the product that you're trying to sell. For example, the HP page is hosted using Apache on HP-UX, but the Compaq page is hosted on Windows 2000. The Compaq page are served on Digital Equipment servers, which if I am not mistaken, was, at one point owned by Compaq (hence their use of the Alpha Processor), whereas HP's page is hosted on HP owned servers.

Jeez... I guess it's not right nowadays to reminise (?) on an old joke.

edit: The Hotmail and MSN pages don't use .NET, they use IIS on WIndows 2000. How many more hits per day do you think that they get per day than the Microsoft page does?

 

[MacCoaster]

Originally posted by crazy_will
Wow! Thought the big joke all of two months ago was the .NET wasn't real because it wasn't being used for anything - just advertised. And even that has been unsucessful so far (I think). Wasn't there talk some month(s) ago that Microsoft was going to kill of .NET? And you know, all those PC makers are just jumping on the .NET bandwagon!

You do realize not everything jumps on the x bandwagon immediately. It takes months, lots of money, etc. to move to another platform (i.e. from classic ASP to ASP.NET). Java wasn't wildly popular when Sun officially released it early last decade; however, it has slowly gained recognition. Now it's wide spread. Patience, my friend.

That talk that Microsoft was going to kill off .NET is nothing but fresh bull. It is their game.

As to your other comment - the Apple page is done on OS X Server, and that's a pig site,is it not? There are plenty of other sites that get served using OS X Server - as well as being served with earlier versions of MacOS.

I'm sorry for not being clear, that was my opinion. Show me 10 or more websites running Mac OS X--I'm not talking about some puny HTML only server. I'm talking about real database transaction servers running Microsoft SQL Server, IBM DB2, or Oracle dealing with sensitive bank data and trading data.

Yes, Apple.com is an exception. I congratulate their effort to use Mac OS X as their server, and it appears to have paid off (cost reduction, maybe, who knows). That is good PR but only to people who care. Not too long ago, they were running Solaris and BSD/OS on Apple.com.

I knew that they were owned by PC Mall. I didn't know that the original name of the company was Creative Computing. I was just pointing out that if your going to sell something - regardless of what your parent company uses - you should use the product that you're trying to sell. For example, the HP page is hosted using Apache on HP-UX, but the Compaq page is hosted on Windows 2000. The Compaq page are served on Digital Equipment servers, which if I am not mistaken, was, at one point owned by Compaq (hence their use of the Alpha Processor), whereas HP's page is hosted on HP owned servers.

Sure, it would be great to use one's own hardware/software. Realistically, you use what is best for the scenario. Remember, migration costs lots of $$$!

edit: The Hotmail and MSN pages don't use .NET, they use IIS on WIndows 2000. How many more hits per day do you think that they get per day than the Microsoft page does?

That'd be correct, and I stand corrected. I had meant .NET itself. Problem with .NET is, what terminology is being used? Did you mean Windows .NET Server? .NET Framework? .NET My Services?

Hotmail and MSN use Passport, which is a part of .NET My Services. Besides, IIRC, hotmail.com servers are using both Windows and FreeBSD.

going to edit my first post to correct that error

 

[funkywhat2]

Sorry if I sounded bitchy, I felt I was. Looking back on it, I really just made this because I was bored. You're right.

 

[pgwalsh]

.net is another step for M$ to control (own) the internet. Get developers on .net and consumers with MSN. That's M$ goal. The more they get people running on it the easier it will be to eliminate the competition without using their operating system as there main weapon.

 

[MacCoaster]

Originally posted by pgwalsh
.net is another step for M$ to control (own) the internet. Get developers on .net and consumers with MSN. That's M$ goal. The more they get people running on it the easier it will be to eliminate the competition without using their operating system as there main weapon.

Not necessarily. For example, a developer can develop products using .NET Framework and Microsoft wouldn't know about it at all.

It's interesting to me that several people in the open source world actually implement Microsoft's platform "ideas." For example, mono is an open source implementation of the ECMA standard for Linux (as Microsoft.NET is a closed-source implementation of the ECMA standard for Windows, except with their shared-source CLI, which works on FreeBSD, Mac OS X, and Linux). In fact, Microsoft.NET allows use of Web Services, which can use XML data from any server, even UNIX ones. So you wouldn't need to convert everything to Microsoft. You could retain the UNIX servers you have.

Back then when COM/COM+ debuted, UNIX programmers realized they needed something like what Microsoft invented. So they went on by creating their own variety of COM/COM+, for example: CORBA.

Has that eliminated the competition? Not so much, to me. Microsoft has a long way to go to eliminate the competition on the server side.

 

[pgwalsh]

Originally posted by MacCoaster

So you wouldn't need to convert everything to Microsoft. You could retain the UNIX servers you have.

So you still need M$ stuff..... Anyway, they may change that when people get sucked into .Net or atleast they offer special features for those whe are on the M$ bandwagon. Then people will convert more as they need upgrades etc.

 

[MacCoaster]

Originally posted by pgwalsh
So you still need M$ stuff..... Anyway, they may change that when people get sucked into .Net or atleast they offer special features for those whe are on the M$ bandwagon. Then people will convert more as they need upgrades etc.

Still incorrect. Mono, dotGNU, etc. are capable of running the ECMA standard sans Microsoft.

So effectively, soon I'll be able to write .NET programs and run it on UNIX only servers and yet retain Windows compatibility, or not even use Windows at all. Just UNIX to UNIX .NET connectivity.

Oh wait, I have Java.