The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
I want to know what you lot fink is ASP As Super Protocal as microsoft calims or is PHP a Perfectly Happy Protocal? You Decide just reply to this with PHP or ASP and a comment if you want.
Tom :o)
Tom :o)
Page:
Ride on brother ;-)
Turbonutter wrote:
> lol, GNU ASP - I've read about this.
Same here.. lauged for a bit, put mag down and got back the the real world!
> lol, GNU ASP - I've read about this.
Same here.. lauged for a bit, put mag down and got back the the real world!
lol, GNU ASP - I've read about this. To be honest you'd be better with WINE and pray :D
aspbean wrote:
> You almost right but a GNU verion of asp which is legal is available
> and will run on apachee and many other server types and is not
> resticted by os either.
>
> Tom :o) - i hope you all realise im only battleing it out for asp cos
> i felt like it i realy don't actually care.
Yes, but it's not proper asp. If you install asp functionality into your Linux webserver you have not one jot of support from Microsoft, who change the spec of their programming languages once a year. You only get support from a small group of volunteer programmers who have to keep up with whatever features MS are offering. It's not the same at all.
> You almost right but a GNU verion of asp which is legal is available
> and will run on apachee and many other server types and is not
> resticted by os either.
>
> Tom :o) - i hope you all realise im only battleing it out for asp cos
> i felt like it i realy don't actually care.
Yes, but it's not proper asp. If you install asp functionality into your Linux webserver you have not one jot of support from Microsoft, who change the spec of their programming languages once a year. You only get support from a small group of volunteer programmers who have to keep up with whatever features MS are offering. It's not the same at all.
Tyla wrote:
> aspbean wrote:
> Miserableman wrote:
> PHP, as ASP ties you to a Microsoft implementation.
>
> Thats not true because i know many other servers that can or do
> impliment asp and as many people in this world have windows 98 they
> can run a server on there with ASP 2.0
>
> Tom :o)
>
> Ok Tom... slight problem here... can you spot it? Win98 = M$, ASP =
> M$. Now I'm not 100% sure about this as i only "fiddle" with
> our infrastructure at work, but I'm almost sure that ASP requires a M$
> based set up using things such as IIS. All requiring a rather
> expensive set of licences for it to be used officially and to be
> supported.
>
> Now PHP will run on "anything", *nix/Mac use it as standard,
> M$ doesn't as it uses it's own technology ie. ASP. Now you can use ASP
> on *nix, but why? If other platforms use a freely availbale, reliable
> and powerful opensourcer language not requiring any expensive
> licencing fees or set up costs, why go to all the hassle to get an
> over rated bulky M$ moster to run on them? Could you imagine the mess
> of crossing Apache with ASP?
>
> ASP "does" tie you to M$, it's an M$ owned technology as is
> anything ending in .NET (also including MSXML, VbSCript, JScript). All
> of these were designed by M$ to run on M$ appz, infrastructures and
> OS's.
You almost right but a GNU verion of asp which is legal is available and will run on apachee and many other server types and is not resticted by os either.
Tom :o) - i hope you all realise im only battleing it out for asp cos i felt like it i realy don't actually care.
> aspbean wrote:
> Miserableman wrote:
> PHP, as ASP ties you to a Microsoft implementation.
>
> Thats not true because i know many other servers that can or do
> impliment asp and as many people in this world have windows 98 they
> can run a server on there with ASP 2.0
>
> Tom :o)
>
> Ok Tom... slight problem here... can you spot it? Win98 = M$, ASP =
> M$. Now I'm not 100% sure about this as i only "fiddle" with
> our infrastructure at work, but I'm almost sure that ASP requires a M$
> based set up using things such as IIS. All requiring a rather
> expensive set of licences for it to be used officially and to be
> supported.
>
> Now PHP will run on "anything", *nix/Mac use it as standard,
> M$ doesn't as it uses it's own technology ie. ASP. Now you can use ASP
> on *nix, but why? If other platforms use a freely availbale, reliable
> and powerful opensourcer language not requiring any expensive
> licencing fees or set up costs, why go to all the hassle to get an
> over rated bulky M$ moster to run on them? Could you imagine the mess
> of crossing Apache with ASP?
>
> ASP "does" tie you to M$, it's an M$ owned technology as is
> anything ending in .NET (also including MSXML, VbSCript, JScript). All
> of these were designed by M$ to run on M$ appz, infrastructures and
> OS's.
You almost right but a GNU verion of asp which is legal is available and will run on apachee and many other server types and is not resticted by os either.
Tom :o) - i hope you all realise im only battleing it out for asp cos i felt like it i realy don't actually care.
aspbean wrote:
> Miserableman wrote:
> PHP, as ASP ties you to a Microsoft implementation.
>
> Thats not true because i know many other servers that can or do
> impliment asp and as many people in this world have windows 98 they
> can run a server on there with ASP 2.0
>
> Tom :o)
I suppose the Pope's a Muslim as well?
> Miserableman wrote:
> PHP, as ASP ties you to a Microsoft implementation.
>
> Thats not true because i know many other servers that can or do
> impliment asp and as many people in this world have windows 98 they
> can run a server on there with ASP 2.0
>
> Tom :o)
I suppose the Pope's a Muslim as well?
aspbean wrote:
> Miserableman wrote:
> PHP, as ASP ties you to a Microsoft implementation.
>
> Thats not true because i know many other servers that can or do
> impliment asp and as many people in this world have windows 98 they
> can run a server on there with ASP 2.0
>
> Tom :o)
Ok Tom... slight problem here... can you spot it? Win98 = M$, ASP = M$. Now I'm not 100% sure about this as i only "fiddle" with our infrastructure at work, but I'm almost sure that ASP requires a M$ based set up using things such as IIS. All requiring a rather expensive set of licences for it to be used officially and to be supported.
Now PHP will run on "anything", *nix/Mac use it as standard, M$ doesn't as it uses it's own technology ie. ASP. Now you can use ASP on *nix, but why? If other platforms use a freely availbale, reliable and powerful opensourcer language not requiring any expensive licencing fees or set up costs, why go to all the hassle to get an over rated bulky M$ moster to run on them? Could you imagine the mess of crossing Apache with ASP?
ASP "does" tie you to M$, it's an M$ owned technology as is anything ending in .NET (also including MSXML, VbSCript, JScript). All of these were designed by M$ to run on M$ appz, infrastructures and OS's.
> Miserableman wrote:
> PHP, as ASP ties you to a Microsoft implementation.
>
> Thats not true because i know many other servers that can or do
> impliment asp and as many people in this world have windows 98 they
> can run a server on there with ASP 2.0
>
> Tom :o)
Ok Tom... slight problem here... can you spot it? Win98 = M$, ASP = M$. Now I'm not 100% sure about this as i only "fiddle" with our infrastructure at work, but I'm almost sure that ASP requires a M$ based set up using things such as IIS. All requiring a rather expensive set of licences for it to be used officially and to be supported.
Now PHP will run on "anything", *nix/Mac use it as standard, M$ doesn't as it uses it's own technology ie. ASP. Now you can use ASP on *nix, but why? If other platforms use a freely availbale, reliable and powerful opensourcer language not requiring any expensive licencing fees or set up costs, why go to all the hassle to get an over rated bulky M$ moster to run on them? Could you imagine the mess of crossing Apache with ASP?
ASP "does" tie you to M$, it's an M$ owned technology as is anything ending in .NET (also including MSXML, VbSCript, JScript). All of these were designed by M$ to run on M$ appz, infrastructures and OS's.
Garin wrote:
> Tyla wrote:
> This is a crap argument, one with no clear answer, but at the end
> of the day comes down to preference, cost and "need".
>
> Ask anyone in the industry today and they'll all say the same
> thing... PHP unless .NET proves itself to deliver!
>
> Given the first sentence, I'll assume the last statement is ironic. :)
More to do with a fried brain! Both statements are correct, just not in the gramatical sense! It does come down to cost and preference, but the current prefered technology is PHP as the world is waiting for .NET to deliver it's promisies! I think that makes more sense?
> Tyla wrote:
> This is a crap argument, one with no clear answer, but at the end
> of the day comes down to preference, cost and "need".
>
> Ask anyone in the industry today and they'll all say the same
> thing... PHP unless .NET proves itself to deliver!
>
> Given the first sentence, I'll assume the last statement is ironic. :)
More to do with a fried brain! Both statements are correct, just not in the gramatical sense! It does come down to cost and preference, but the current prefered technology is PHP as the world is waiting for .NET to deliver it's promisies! I think that makes more sense?
Tyla wrote:
> This is a crap argument, one with no clear answer, but at the end of
> the day comes down to preference, cost and "need".
>
> Ask anyone in the industry today and they'll all say the same thing...
> PHP unless .NET proves itself to deliver!
Given the first sentence, I'll assume the last statement is ironic. :)
> This is a crap argument, one with no clear answer, but at the end of
> the day comes down to preference, cost and "need".
>
> Ask anyone in the industry today and they'll all say the same thing...
> PHP unless .NET proves itself to deliver!
Given the first sentence, I'll assume the last statement is ironic. :)
Page: