| |
In lugnet.space, Jeromy Irvine writes:
> I'd like to respectfully disagree with your comments on NT/IIS. I work
> with websites running on NT/IIS every day, and I find it to be very
> stable when it's configured properly. The configuration doesn't even
> take much work, really, you just need to know how to do it. The problem
> is that most people don't take the 15 minutes that it takes to get the
> thing running correctly. My website is hosted on an NT/IIS server, and
> I've had less than 10 minutes down-time in 6 months.
Ok. :)
I do know a little bit about NT/2000 and IIS. I'm a Microsoft Certified
Systems Enginner and full-time NT system administrator, myself, responsible
for a number of production NT4 and Windows 2000 servers and scads of NT
workstations. I've run a few IIS webservers (I'm responsible for one
production server right now) and I agree - it certainly *can* be made to be
more stable and reliable.
Just about anything is vulnerable and fairly unreliable out of the box,
which is the way far too many IIS servers remain after they're setup.
> All that said, I've also used Unix servers and found them to be very
> reliable as well. I just don't find much uptime/performance difference
> between a properly configured NT server and a properly configured Unix
> server. Just figure which one fits the task best and use it.
I'm sure there are certain NT servers performing certain tasks that perform
as well over time as other servers running various flavors of Unix.
The problem with shared hosting providers, though, is that these places that
specialize in providing very low cost hosting to scads and scads of people
tend to maximize the number of clients per server, because the more
customers they squeeze into a server the higher their profit. Given that,
I'd much rather have those virtual sites running on a well-configured Unix
box over a well-configured NT box.
That doesn't mean there aren't good NT hosting providers. But given the
fact that this one was mentioned as a possibility without any personal
experience to back it up, I'd make the attempt to find out what people have
to say about them. I know Pair provides good reliable service - that's why
I mentioned them as an alternative. The random MS slam was thrown in for
free. :)
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Space World Hosting
|
| "Mike Stanley" <cjc@NOSPAMnewsguy.com> wrote in message news:G328Ls.JJ@lugnet.com... <big snip> (...) I'd like to respectfully disagree with your comments on NT/IIS. I work with websites running on NT/IIS every day, and I find it to be very stable (...) (24 years ago, 27-Oct-00, to lugnet.space)
|
17 Messages in This Thread:
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
