[Gllug] Apache 'low-value'

[Christopher Hunter]

On Tuesday 17 Jun 2003 10:18 pm, Richard Turner wrote:
> On Tuesday 17 Jun 2003 10:55 am, Christopher Hunter wrote:
> > He probably meant "low priced"!  Semantic inaccuracies cause many of the
> > major flaws in M$ bloatware.
>
> Shame really - if my CEO read that, being the technophobe that she is,
> she'd be quite distraught that our webserver is Apache on RH Linux.  It'd
> be a nightmare trying to explain to her that this combo is _so_ much better
> than trying to do the same task on Windows with IIS.
>
> You're probably right, he almost certainly did mean low priced, but that's
> not what the incognisant read when they see articles like this :-(

I've often wondered if it's a competency issue (mine, of course), but I have 
NEVER managed to get Windoze & IIS to do anything useful without breaking!  I 
even bothered to take the M$ MCSE/DBA courses and exams, and passed them (in 
the days when they might have meant anything).

More recent experience has shown that the only really viable option these days 
is RH / Apache.  CEOs I've worked for have thrown fits when they have been 
told that their site's "not M$". 

Chris

-- 
Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug at linux.co.uk
http://list.ftech.net/mailman/listinfo/gllug