Reliable, entry-level ASP web hosting?

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by John Doe, Nov 19, 2004.

  1. John Doe

    John Doe Guest

    Hi,

    I am looking for an affordable ASP hosting plan with the following
    characteristics:

    - NZ based
    - very low traffic
    - high availability/low latency required - this point is very
    important
    - entry-level database access support (eg. MS Access)
    - 10 or 20 MB of storage, with a possibility to increase in the future
    - pay by Direct Debit

    I will consider PHP alternatives, if I have MySQL support and the
    price is really low.

    This is very serious stuff and is for long-term hosting.

    Thanks for any advice/offers.
    swebh at maxnet dot co dot nz
     
    John Doe, Nov 19, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. John Doe

    Steve Guest

    John Doe wrote:
    > Hi,
    >
    > I am looking for an affordable ASP hosting plan with the following
    > characteristics:
    >
    > - NZ based
    > - very low traffic
    > - high availability/low latency required - this point is very
    > important
    > - entry-level database access support (eg. MS Access)
    > - 10 or 20 MB of storage, with a possibility to increase in the future
    > - pay by Direct Debit
    >
    > I will consider PHP alternatives, if I have MySQL support and the
    > price is really low.
    >
    > This is very serious stuff and is for long-term hosting.
    >
    > Thanks for any advice/offers.
    > swebh at maxnet dot co dot nz


    I can't take anyone seriously who calls Access a database, sorry
     
    Steve, Nov 19, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. John Doe

    Rob Guest

    Whats the price you are after. For those requirements you are looking at at
    least 25-30, especially if you want high reliablity. Anything lesss and you
    will get monkeys.


    "John Doe" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Hi,
    >
    > I am looking for an affordable ASP hosting plan with the following
    > characteristics:
    >
    > - NZ based
    > - very low traffic
    > - high availability/low latency required - this point is very
    > important
    > - entry-level database access support (eg. MS Access)
    > - 10 or 20 MB of storage, with a possibility to increase in the future
    > - pay by Direct Debit
    >
    > I will consider PHP alternatives, if I have MySQL support and the
    > price is really low.
    >
    > This is very serious stuff and is for long-term hosting.
    >
    > Thanks for any advice/offers.
    > swebh at maxnet dot co dot nz
     
    Rob, Nov 19, 2004
    #3
  4. John Doe

    thing Guest

    Steve wrote:
    > John Doe wrote:
    >
    >> Hi,
    >>
    >> I am looking for an affordable ASP hosting plan with the following
    >> characteristics:
    >>
    >> - NZ based
    >> - very low traffic
    >> - high availability/low latency required - this point is very
    >> important
    >> - entry-level database access support (eg. MS Access)
    >> - 10 or 20 MB of storage, with a possibility to increase in the future
    >> - pay by Direct Debit
    >>
    >> I will consider PHP alternatives, if I have MySQL support and the
    >> price is really low.
    >>
    >> This is very serious stuff and is for long-term hosting.
    >>
    >> Thanks for any advice/offers.
    >> swebh at maxnet dot co dot nz

    >
    >
    > I can't take anyone seriously who calls Access a database, sorry


    heh, "serious stuff" and wants to use access......

    regards

    Thing
     
    thing, Nov 20, 2004
    #4
  5. John Doe

    Rob Guest

    "thing" <> wrote in message
    news:ZpBnd.6778$...
    > Steve wrote:
    >> John Doe wrote:
    >>
    >>> Hi,
    >>>
    >>> I am looking for an affordable ASP hosting plan with the following
    >>> characteristics:
    >>>
    >>> - NZ based
    >>> - very low traffic
    >>> - high availability/low latency required - this point is very
    >>> important
    >>> - entry-level database access support (eg. MS Access)
    >>> - 10 or 20 MB of storage, with a possibility to increase in the future
    >>> - pay by Direct Debit
    >>>
    >>> I will consider PHP alternatives, if I have MySQL support and the
    >>> price is really low.
    >>>
    >>> This is very serious stuff and is for long-term hosting.
    >>>
    >>> Thanks for any advice/offers.
    >>> swebh at maxnet dot co dot nz

    >>
    >>
    >> I can't take anyone seriously who calls Access a database, sorry

    >
    > heh, "serious stuff" and wants to use access......
    >
    > regards
    >
    > Thing
    >


    heh, wants to pay peanuts, but wants both reliable and nz servers!
     
    Rob, Nov 20, 2004
    #5
  6. John Doe

    thing Guest

    Rob wrote:
    > "thing" <> wrote in message
    > news:ZpBnd.6778$...
    >
    >>Steve wrote:
    >>
    >>>John Doe wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>Hi,
    >>>>
    >>>>I am looking for an affordable ASP hosting plan with the following
    >>>>characteristics:
    >>>>
    >>>>- NZ based
    >>>>- very low traffic
    >>>>- high availability/low latency required - this point is very
    >>>>important
    >>>>- entry-level database access support (eg. MS Access)
    >>>>- 10 or 20 MB of storage, with a possibility to increase in the future
    >>>>- pay by Direct Debit
    >>>>
    >>>>I will consider PHP alternatives, if I have MySQL support and the
    >>>>price is really low.
    >>>>
    >>>>This is very serious stuff and is for long-term hosting.
    >>>>
    >>>>Thanks for any advice/offers.
    >>>>swebh at maxnet dot co dot nz
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>I can't take anyone seriously who calls Access a database, sorry

    >>
    >>heh, "serious stuff" and wants to use access......
    >>
    >>regards
    >>
    >>Thing
    >>

    >
    >
    > heh, wants to pay peanuts, but wants both reliable and nz servers!
    >
    >


    Yes well unfortunately the US is a big price driver, from what? $8US a
    month or something?

    There is some silly pricing going on, anything from teenagers doing web
    sites for $25 where a "real" company would charges a few hundred $, to
    hosting with Companies expecting to get on line for next to nothing
    because their son is the previously mentioned teenager who has a win98
    box at home on the end of a cable modem...

    Me I keep out of it, too many idiots, with impossible expectations,
    expecting it for close to free.

    There is just too much labour and hardware costs involved with doing it
    properly without huge scaling....I actually wonder just how many of
    these ppl run raided disks and do daily backups (and no I dont mean use
    the same single tape every day), have UPSs etc etc to protect the data....

    regards

    Thing
     
    thing, Nov 20, 2004
    #6
  7. John Doe

    John Doe Guest

    Steve <> wrote in message news:<cnlqf2$nsj$>...
    > John Doe wrote:
    > > Hi,
    > >
    > > I am looking for an affordable ASP hosting plan with the following
    > > characteristics:
    > >
    > > - NZ based
    > > - very low traffic
    > > - high availability/low latency required - this point is very
    > > important
    > > - entry-level database access support (eg. MS Access)
    > > - 10 or 20 MB of storage, with a possibility to increase in the future
    > > - pay by Direct Debit
    > >
    > > I will consider PHP alternatives, if I have MySQL support and the
    > > price is really low.
    > >
    > > This is very serious stuff and is for long-term hosting.
    > >
    > > Thanks for any advice/offers.
    > > swebh at maxnet dot co dot nz

    >
    > I can't take anyone seriously who calls Access a database, sorry


    Other people can, so there is definitely no worry.
     
    John Doe, Nov 20, 2004
    #7
  8. John Doe

    Guest

    On Sat, 20 Nov 2004 02:40:43 -0800, John Doe wrote:

    >> > I am looking for an affordable ASP hosting plan with the following
    >> > characteristics:
    >> >
    >> > - NZ based
    >> > - very low traffic
    >> > - high availability/low latency required - this point is very
    >> > important
    >> > - entry-level database access support (eg. MS Access) - 10 or 20 MB of
    >> > storage, with a possibility to increase in the future - pay by Direct
    >> > Debit
    >> >
    >> > I will consider PHP alternatives, if I have MySQL support and the
    >> > price is really low.
    >> >
    >> > This is very serious stuff and is for long-term hosting.
    >> >
    >> > Thanks for any advice/offers.
    >> > swebh at maxnet dot co dot nz

    >>
    >> I can't take anyone seriously who calls Access a database, sorry

    >
    > Other people can, so there is definitely no worry.


    LOL - he was wanting Windows hosting (asp) with high availability.


    Divine

    --
    "Even the most fanatical Microsoft supporter has to see that Longhorn has
    become Shorthorn."
     
    , Nov 20, 2004
    #8
  9. John Doe

    Gurble Guest

    On 20 Nov 2004 02:40:43 -0800, (John Doe) had
    this to say:

    >
    >> I can't take anyone seriously who calls Access a database, sorry

    >
    >Other people can, so there is definitely no worry.


    That's the problem, really.

    Many of those "other people" are relying on your judgment to provide
    them with the best tool for the job.

    You are not.

    I would be prepared to bet a reasonable number of chocolate fish that
    you have not used a real DBMS, or, at least, that you have not
    proficient with the use of a real DBMS.

    The reason you have got a few chuckles here (and, I'm sure, a lot more
    from the lurkers) is that there are many database professionals who
    frequent this group. In the real world, MS Access is a joke - it's
    really a toy DB for non-professionals to have a bit of a play. I mean,
    really, allowing spaces in field names! What's that about?!? And ever
    heard of the separation of the DB and App layers?!?

    If you're worried about the cost of a real DBMS, check out Firebird
    (Interbase). It's open source and free, as in free something-or-other.
    Whilst some of it's advanced optimisations need a wee bit of work
    still (you can get major efficiency gains via minor restructurings of
    your SQL), it still beats Access in performance by 4 country miles.

    If you're worried about the complexity, don't be. You shouldn't be in
    this industry if you're not prepared to be constantly learning, and
    there are huge benefits to graduating to a real DBMS. And, after the
    initial learning curve, I would bet even more chocolate fish that
    you'll never look back.

    If it's a web app, you could try mySQL, which is a very light and lean
    DBMS designed specifically for those that don't have too high
    requirements who want to run it on a web server. It's provided by
    almost every hosting company in existence, and is light, fast, and
    reliable (although it doesn't support some of the more advanced
    features of other DBMSs).

    Anyway, it sounds like your application is relatively mission
    critical. If you weely weely want to stick with Microsoft, at least
    check out MS SQL Server. Or better yet, look at the multitude of other
    options available that are more suited to your requirements, and don't
    require that the web server is running Windows.

    HTH.

    (Oh, and in answer to your original question, try Web Drive -
    www.webdrive.co.nz).
     
    Gurble, Nov 20, 2004
    #9
  10. John Doe

    C9H8O4 Guest

    "Gurble" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On 20 Nov 2004 02:40:43 -0800, (John Doe) had
    > this to say:
    >
    >>
    >>> I can't take anyone seriously who calls Access a database, sorry

    >>
    >>Other people can, so there is definitely no worry.

    >
    > That's the problem, really.
    >
    > Many of those "other people" are relying on your judgment to provide
    > them with the best tool for the job.
    >
    > You are not.
    >
    > I would be prepared to bet a reasonable number of chocolate fish that
    > you have not used a real DBMS, or, at least, that you have not
    > proficient with the use of a real DBMS.
    >
    > The reason you have got a few chuckles here (and, I'm sure, a lot more
    > from the lurkers) is that there are many database professionals who
    > frequent this group. In the real world, MS Access is a joke - it's
    > really a toy DB for non-professionals to have a bit of a play. I mean,
    > really, allowing spaces in field names! What's that about?!? And ever
    > heard of the separation of the DB and App layers?!?
    >
    > If you're worried about the cost of a real DBMS, check out Firebird
    > (Interbase). It's open source and free, as in free something-or-other.
    > Whilst some of it's advanced optimisations need a wee bit of work
    > still (you can get major efficiency gains via minor restructurings of
    > your SQL), it still beats Access in performance by 4 country miles.
    >
    > If you're worried about the complexity, don't be. You shouldn't be in
    > this industry if you're not prepared to be constantly learning, and
    > there are huge benefits to graduating to a real DBMS. And, after the
    > initial learning curve, I would bet even more chocolate fish that
    > you'll never look back.
    >
    > If it's a web app, you could try mySQL, which is a very light and lean
    > DBMS designed specifically for those that don't have too high
    > requirements who want to run it on a web server. It's provided by
    > almost every hosting company in existence, and is light, fast, and
    > reliable (although it doesn't support some of the more advanced
    > features of other DBMSs).
    >
    > Anyway, it sounds like your application is relatively mission
    > critical. If you weely weely want to stick with Microsoft, at least
    > check out MS SQL Server. Or better yet, look at the multitude of other
    > options available that are more suited to your requirements, and don't
    > require that the web server is running Windows.
    >
    > HTH.
    >
    > (Oh, and in answer to your original question, try Web Drive -
    > www.webdrive.co.nz).


    FWIW, a free version of SQL Server called SQL Server 2005 Express Edition is
    downloadable from http://lab.msdn.microsoft.com/express/sql/default.aspx ,
    the top 10 feature list is at
    http://lab.msdn.microsoft.com/express/sql/top10/default.aspx

    http://lab.msdn.microsoft.com/express/ is also worth a look
     
    C9H8O4, Nov 20, 2004
    #10
  11. It seems like Sun, 21 Nov 2004 00:21:30 +1300 was when Gurble
    <> said Blah blah blah...

    >The reason you have got a few chuckles here (and, I'm sure, a lot more
    >from the lurkers) is that there are many database professionals who
    >frequent this group. In the real world, MS Access is a joke - it's
    >really a toy DB for non-professionals to have a bit of a play. I mean,
    >really, allowing spaces in field names! What's that about?!? And ever
    >heard of the separation of the DB and App layers?!?


    Yet our country's most popular school administration program (Musac)
    was (maybe is, last I heard they were moving to MS-SQL) just a fancy
    GUI on top of Access databases.

    If you want to see a good reason why you shouldn't build your
    database-powered applications around Access, Musac would be a
    particularly good example.
    --
    Regards,
    Waylon Kenning.

    1st Year B.I.T. WelTec
     
    Waylon Kenning, Nov 20, 2004
    #11
  12. John Doe

    Italian Jobs Guest

    On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 11:02:48 +1300, Waylon Kenning
    <> wrote:

    >It seems like Sun, 21 Nov 2004 00:21:30 +1300 was when Gurble
    ><> said Blah blah blah...
    >
    >>The reason you have got a few chuckles here (and, I'm sure, a lot more
    >>from the lurkers) is that there are many database professionals who
    >>frequent this group. In the real world, MS Access is a joke - it's
    >>really a toy DB for non-professionals to have a bit of a play. I mean,
    >>really, allowing spaces in field names! What's that about?!? And ever
    >>heard of the separation of the DB and App layers?!?

    >
    >Yet our country's most popular school administration program (Musac)
    >was (maybe is, last I heard they were moving to MS-SQL) just a fancy
    >GUI on top of Access databases.
    >


    Less of the fancy. It's a damn ugly GUI.

    >If you want to see a good reason why you shouldn't build your
    >database-powered applications around Access, Musac would be a
    >particularly good example.


    It's really very unfriendly for non-DB users. And busy school
    offices/classrooms are inhabited by people who just want to access
    their data (no thats not a pun).
     
    Italian Jobs, Nov 20, 2004
    #12
  13. In article <pan.2004.11.20.10.46.07.323721@TRACKER> in nz.comp on Sat, 20
    Nov 2004 23:46:08 +1300,
    <> says...
    > On Sat, 20 Nov 2004 02:40:43 -0800, John Doe wrote:
    >
    > >> > I am looking for an affordable ASP hosting plan with the following
    > >> > characteristics:
    > >> >
    > >> > - NZ based
    > >> > - very low traffic
    > >> > - high availability/low latency required - this point is very
    > >> > important
    > >> > - entry-level database access support (eg. MS Access) - 10 or 20 MB of
    > >> > storage, with a possibility to increase in the future - pay by Direct
    > >> > Debit
    > >> >
    > >> > I will consider PHP alternatives, if I have MySQL support and the
    > >> > price is really low.
    > >> >
    > >> > This is very serious stuff and is for long-term hosting.
    > >> >
    > >> > Thanks for any advice/offers.
    > >> > swebh at maxnet dot co dot nz
    > >>
    > >> I can't take anyone seriously who calls Access a database, sorry

    > >
    > > Other people can, so there is definitely no worry.

    >
    > LOL - he was wanting Windows hosting (asp) with high availability.


    Like microsoft.com, that's a high availability site
     
    Patrick Dunford, Nov 21, 2004
    #13
  14. In article <> in nz.comp on
    Sun, 21 Nov 2004 00:21:30 +1300, Gurble <> says...
    > On 20 Nov 2004 02:40:43 -0800, (John Doe) had
    > this to say:
    >
    > >
    > >> I can't take anyone seriously who calls Access a database, sorry

    > >
    > >Other people can, so there is definitely no worry.

    >
    > That's the problem, really.
    >
    > Many of those "other people" are relying on your judgment to provide
    > them with the best tool for the job.
    >
    > You are not.
    >
    > I would be prepared to bet a reasonable number of chocolate fish that
    > you have not used a real DBMS, or, at least, that you have not
    > proficient with the use of a real DBMS.
    >
    > The reason you have got a few chuckles here (and, I'm sure, a lot more
    > from the lurkers) is that there are many database professionals who
    > frequent this group. In the real world, MS Access is a joke - it's
    > really a toy DB for non-professionals to have a bit of a play. I mean,
    > really, allowing spaces in field names! What's that about?!? And ever
    > heard of the separation of the DB and App layers?!?


    Access can be used as a nice frontend to SQL Server and a few other
    client server models using ODBC drivers.

    Your post was sounding rational until the last few lines where the anti
    MS sneer started to take over.

    Access is a desktop DB rather than client server. It meets a certain
    market where the expense and technical complexity of a client server
    implementation is not required.
     
    Patrick Dunford, Nov 21, 2004
    #14
  15. In article <> in nz.comp on
    Sun, 21 Nov 2004 11:02:48 +1300, Waylon Kenning
    <> says...
    > It seems like Sun, 21 Nov 2004 00:21:30 +1300 was when Gurble
    > <> said Blah blah blah...
    >
    > >The reason you have got a few chuckles here (and, I'm sure, a lot more
    > >from the lurkers) is that there are many database professionals who
    > >frequent this group. In the real world, MS Access is a joke - it's
    > >really a toy DB for non-professionals to have a bit of a play. I mean,
    > >really, allowing spaces in field names! What's that about?!? And ever
    > >heard of the separation of the DB and App layers?!?

    >
    > Yet our country's most popular school administration program (Musac)
    > was (maybe is, last I heard they were moving to MS-SQL) just a fancy
    > GUI on top of Access databases.
    >
    > If you want to see a good reason why you shouldn't build your
    > database-powered applications around Access, Musac would be a
    > particularly good example.


    Are you referring to the limitations of the Access GUI or the JET
    database engine?

    I have always loathed the built in limitations of the GUI which is
    obviously intended to compel the more competent user to move up to VB or
    VC++.

    On the other hand, the database engine is not so bad and being able to
    drive Access database files from another app using ODBC or ADO is a big
    plus.
     
    Patrick Dunford, Nov 21, 2004
    #15
  16. John Doe

    Gurble Guest

    On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 14:21:13 +1300, Patrick Dunford
    <> had this to say:

    >In article <> in nz.comp on
    >Sun, 21 Nov 2004 00:21:30 +1300, Gurble <> says...
    >> On 20 Nov 2004 02:40:43 -0800, (John Doe) had
    >> this to say:
    >>
    >> The reason you have got a few chuckles here (and, I'm sure, a lot more
    >> from the lurkers) is that there are many database professionals who
    >> frequent this group. In the real world, MS Access is a joke - it's
    >> really a toy DB for non-professionals to have a bit of a play. I mean,
    >> really, allowing spaces in field names! What's that about?!? And ever
    >> heard of the separation of the DB and App layers?!?

    >
    >Access can be used as a nice frontend to SQL Server and a few other
    >client server models using ODBC drivers.


    Well, a frontend. "Nice" might be a wee stretch...

    >Your post was sounding rational until the last few lines where the anti
    >MS sneer started to take over.


    Which two lines? The ones you've quoted above (which are not
    anti-Microsoft per se, but anti any DBMS that allows spaces in field
    names, and has no separation between the DB and App layers by
    default), or the one where I mention that MS SQL is probably the only
    DBMS that only runs on the Windows platform (no surprises there!)?
    Given their track record, you can't honestly say that you believe that
    Windows is the best platform for a web server?

    I wouldn't call either "anti MS sneer". It's about using the best tool
    for the job. At work, we use Windows on the desktop and Linux for web
    and DB servers. For clients, we recommend the best solution for their
    requirements - sometimes it's on Windows, sometimes it on Linux.
    Sometimes it's mySQL, sometimes it's Firebird, sometimes it's Oracle,
    sometimes it's even Paradox embedded, and sometimes it's MS SQL
    Server. Sometimes it's something completely different. However, it's
    never Access.

    >Access is a desktop DB rather than client server. It meets a certain
    >market where the expense and technical complexity of a client server
    >implementation is not required.


    Exactly. A toy DB used by non-professionals to have a play with
    databases. That's fine, but it shouldn't be used in the environment
    that the OP alluded to - ie a mission critical application running on
    a public web server.
     
    Gurble, Nov 21, 2004
    #16
  17. In article <> in nz.comp on
    Sun, 21 Nov 2004 14:51:33 +1300, Gurble <> says...
    > On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 14:21:13 +1300, Patrick Dunford
    > <> had this to say:
    >
    > >In article <> in nz.comp on
    > >Sun, 21 Nov 2004 00:21:30 +1300, Gurble <> says...
    > >> On 20 Nov 2004 02:40:43 -0800, (John Doe) had
    > >> this to say:
    > >>
    > >> The reason you have got a few chuckles here (and, I'm sure, a lot more
    > >> from the lurkers) is that there are many database professionals who
    > >> frequent this group. In the real world, MS Access is a joke - it's
    > >> really a toy DB for non-professionals to have a bit of a play. I mean,
    > >> really, allowing spaces in field names! What's that about?!? And ever
    > >> heard of the separation of the DB and App layers?!?

    > >
    > >Access can be used as a nice frontend to SQL Server and a few other
    > >client server models using ODBC drivers.

    >
    > Well, a frontend. "Nice" might be a wee stretch...
    >
    > >Your post was sounding rational until the last few lines where the anti
    > >MS sneer started to take over.

    >
    > Which two lines? The ones you've quoted above (which are not
    > anti-Microsoft per se, but anti any DBMS that allows spaces in field
    > names,


    Well since you're all wound up about that, how about DBMSs that use case
    sensitive field names etc.

    What is the big deal, really there is none.

    > and has no separation between the DB and App layers by
    > default),


    And the problem here is? Not all DBMSs are client server.

    > Given their track record, you can't honestly say that you believe that
    > Windows is the best platform for a web server?


    Personally, I have no firm opinion either way.

    What is this problem with "track record"? They wouldn't have had a
    perfect one but neither would any version of Linux. I remember reading
    not so long ago about how the Debian servers running on Apache were taken
    offline by a hacker.

    >
    > I wouldn't call either "anti MS sneer". It's about using the best tool
    > for the job. At work, we use Windows on the desktop and Linux for web
    > and DB servers. For clients, we recommend the best solution for their
    > requirements - sometimes it's on Windows, sometimes it on Linux.
    > Sometimes it's mySQL, sometimes it's Firebird, sometimes it's Oracle,
    > sometimes it's even Paradox embedded, and sometimes it's MS SQL
    > Server. Sometimes it's something completely different. However, it's
    > never Access.


    But apparently it is that Paradox crap (I have used Paradox extensively)
    - which has, shock horror, spaces in field names! If you use Paradox you
    must have to put up with all that BDE install stuff and all those corrupt
    header/table messages especially if more than one user is accessing the
    data and their machine is not quite set up exactly right.
     
    Patrick Dunford, Nov 21, 2004
    #17
  18. John Doe

    Guest

    On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 14:17:21 +1300, Patrick Dunford wrote:

    >> LOL - he was wanting Windows hosting (asp) with high availability.

    >
    > Like microsoft.com, that's a high availability site


    Hosted on one server is it?


    Divine

    --
    "Even the most fanatical Microsoft supporter has to see that Longhorn has
    become Shorthorn."
     
    , Nov 21, 2004
    #18
  19. John Doe

    Gurble Guest

    On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 15:30:50 +1300, Patrick Dunford
    <> had this to say:

    >> >Your post was sounding rational until the last few lines where the anti
    >> >MS sneer started to take over.

    >>
    >> Which two lines? The ones you've quoted above (which are not
    >> anti-Microsoft per se, but anti any DBMS that allows spaces in field
    >> names,

    >
    >Well since you're all wound up about that, how about DBMSs that use case
    >sensitive field names etc.
    >
    >What is the big deal, really there is none.


    Allowing spaces in field names is extremely bad practice.

    >> and has no separation between the DB and App layers by
    >> default),

    >
    >And the problem here is? Not all DBMSs are client server.


    They don't need to be 3-tier, however most applications benefit from
    being designed around at least a 2-tier approach. It's simple Database
    101. I'm assuming you have no formal database training?

    >> Given their track record, you can't honestly say that you believe that
    >> Windows is the best platform for a web server?

    >
    >Personally, I have no firm opinion either way.
    >
    >What is this problem with "track record"? They wouldn't have had a
    >perfect one but neither would any version of Linux. I remember reading
    >not so long ago about how the Debian servers running on Apache were taken
    >offline by a hacker.


    Any system implemented incorrectly will potentially fail. However,
    there is a lot more probability that an IIS web server will fail, or
    will have security vulnerabilities, even if implemented correctly,
    based on it's track record. And track records are extremely important
    - what else can you base a decision on? FUD?

    >> I wouldn't call either "anti MS sneer". It's about using the best tool
    >> for the job. At work, we use Windows on the desktop and Linux for web
    >> and DB servers. For clients, we recommend the best solution for their
    >> requirements - sometimes it's on Windows, sometimes it on Linux.
    >> Sometimes it's mySQL, sometimes it's Firebird, sometimes it's Oracle,
    >> sometimes it's even Paradox embedded, and sometimes it's MS SQL
    >> Server. Sometimes it's something completely different. However, it's
    >> never Access.

    >
    >But apparently it is that Paradox crap (I have used Paradox extensively)
    >- which has, shock horror, spaces in field names! If you use Paradox you
    >must have to put up with all that BDE install stuff and all those corrupt
    >header/table messages especially if more than one user is accessing the
    >data and their machine is not quite set up exactly right.


    To be honest, we haven't used Paradox for about 4 years, and, yes, I
    agree it's not exactly brilliant. Not too bad for standalone embedded
    systems, however. Still, there's no need *not* to use 3-tier for most
    applications in this day and age.
     
    Gurble, Nov 21, 2004
    #19
  20. John Doe

    C9H8O4 Guest

    <> wrote in message
    news:pan.2004.11.21.03.21.54.982166@TRACKER...
    > On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 14:17:21 +1300, Patrick Dunford wrote:
    >
    >>> LOL - he was wanting Windows hosting (asp) with high availability.

    >>
    >> Like microsoft.com, that's a high availability site

    >
    > Hosted on one server is it?
    >
    >
    > Divine
    >
    > --
    > "Even the most fanatical Microsoft supporter has to see that Longhorn has
    > become Shorthorn."
    >


    In one fell swoop you decimate the last remaining cred you had. Doh !
     
    C9H8O4, Nov 21, 2004
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Silverstrand

    Digital Camera Buyer's Guide - Entry Level

    Silverstrand, Oct 18, 2005, in forum: Front Page News
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    694
    Silverstrand
    Oct 18, 2005
  2. Bhoona

    US web hosting or UK web hosting comapnies?

    Bhoona, Mar 3, 2004, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    560
    Tina - AffordableHOST.com
    Mar 4, 2004
  3. TechNews

    Most Reliable Hosting Providers during May

    TechNews, Jun 3, 2004, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    436
    Scrote
    Jun 3, 2004
  4. woobles

    Help please. Looking for entry level SLR

    woobles, Dec 21, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    21
    Views:
    1,481
    Carl Miller
    Dec 24, 2003
  5. ghost
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    253
    shlomo
    Jul 9, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page