Microsoft plans to cut web server licensing restrictions from Windows Server 2008 to better compete against open-source alternatives, according to CRN. The pub cites an unspecified internal Microsoft document revealing that Windows Web Server 2008 will run any type of database software and won't restrict the number of users …
Had to be said.
Windows IIS MySQL PHP ?
Well its better than the alternatives
WIMP - Windows, IIS, MySQL and PHP
WISA - Windows, IIS, SQL Server, ASP.Net
Can anybody else do better?
Nah, it would be WIMP
Windows, IIS, MySQL and PHP. A fun combination.
How about WISA?
SQL Server 2005
Actually it would be called WIMP if using the Microsoft web server (IIS); I find this to be fitting.
WISA, actually: Windows / IIS / SQL Server / ASP.NET
not WAMP but LIMP
Lighter license windows
There are pre-built WAMP packages.
But running an Internet-facing Windows server is a lot like removing all the locks on your home, and spending your life naked, bent over, and facing away from the front door.
Except it might not be nearly that much fun.
Linux / Apache / Postgres / Scipting (LAPS) you mean surly.
I'll decide what it means later
it is what i do when i consider why i would run a CPU-sucking GUI on a server, and throw in a load of vulns, too. hey, i know, let's put it online!
in UNIX-flavored land, i can install a GUI and disable it at will. do not try that on your Windows box, without a bare-metal backup.
and that's just a start.
there are so many reasons not to, i don't know where to start...
To be (nearly) fair - the windows GUI, when at the "press Ctrl+Alt+Del to login" prompt doesn't consume much in the way of CPU cycles. Also, one of the biggest differences between the (later) windows server OSes and the window desktop OSes is that the user session is heavily limited resource wise so it can't use all CPU resources and slow the server down to a stop. Anybody who remembers the utter stupidity of the OpenGL screen savers running on NT4 server will have spotted this one...
It used to be the case that all savvy sys admins would drop the pixel depth to as low as possible and the screen resolution as well however with modern graphics cards they're usually heavily optimised for 32 bit graphics and reasonable screen resolutions. Of course, if you're daft enough to use any form of memory sharing graphics (i.e., built in graphics chipsets or those criminally marketted discrete chipsets that use main board memory) then you get what you deserve by way of performance hits.
Not that windows OSes are in any way efficient by way of resources, but it's not the GUI that's the culprit.
The Money Shot ...... InterNetworking ReSourced Assets.
""Some of Microsoft's licensing policies don't work in a virtualized world. This needs to be addressed across all products," said the source, who asked not to be named."
I think that understatement from one of those ubiquitous quoted anonymous sources ..... http://www.crn.com/software/205207950 ..... says it all, don't you, for Virtualisation is not a Tangible Asset, it is an Intangible Processing.
In Reality, a whole NeuReal and QuITe SurReal, Changed Environment for Proxy and Relatively Covert ReDistribution of Power. Deny IT if you wish to Crash the System, XXXXPlore IT to Strengthen the Base and ITs Methodologies/Simply CompleXXXX Algorithms is and would be sound, always timely Universal Virtual Force advice.
Despite all that though, you can still buy into Intangible Processing for ITs Greater Controls, although don't be XXXXPecting that Control will be Exclusive as IT will always be only a Powerful Control Shared for Virtualised Application of Modified Protocols, led by AIMeritocracy. ........ for the more orange Brains over Brawn [carrot rather than stick] Policy.
And IT won't be going away, you know, IT'll just keep further embedding itself in the System so that the System Morphs into ITs Likeness ...... aka Sleeping with the Enemy to discover their Passionate Weaknesses. :-)
[Whenever it is possible to die on any day, how can one trust anyone who says they are going to give away their billionaire fortunes before they die, if they still have them? It smacks of a cheap cynical PR exercise, thus rendering any decision liable to being two-faced in extremes? The Proof is always in the eating of the Pudding and not in its Preparation or Ingredients, for they are available to every man and his dog.]
Opps, so much for cut and paste. My previous post should have been headed RAS
Windows - sod off
Apache will ALWAYS be the leader in PHP/MYSQL - it's just far too good compared with Windows - yes Windows has the nice GUI but thats all it's got. You need 50GB of RAM just to run a Windows Server ;) - Where as apache run's nicely with any amount
As far as I am concerned - I will always use Linux/Apache Servers for my websites - they work better, more secure, more stable and far easier to keep up-to-date.
I don't know why I bother to read these comments when they're all written by idiots without the first idea of how to run professional internet services. "You need 50GB of RAM just to run a Windows Server ;) - Where as apache run's nicely with any amount" even tongue in cheek it shows a disregard for little things like facts.
I recommend that in the future, before commenting on things you don't understand you think for a moment about what you really want to share with the world, and if it's just some half baked 'hur hur windows bad' comment just save us all the hassle and go spunk it up the wall on IRC rather than a news site.
So you'll approve of the Server Core Installation feature of Windows 2008 then, Mr Shubin?
Can see where this is coming from.
The restrictive Windows Server license was a major factor in choosing our web server platform, I could not figure out justification for paying loads more money to Microsoft just for the privilege of possibly having a more popular site.
I opted for Wamp but not on the "Server" platform and hidden behind a good firewall. Despite many, many attacks especially from our Eastern friends, the site was never compromised, although the latest version of Apache did bring some interesting new bugs with it.
@ Mark Rendle
i approve of that one feature, but i still consider the product inferior because of:
-the primitive feature set
-the closed source that is illegal to alter
-the absence of AppArmor/SELinux
-MS marketing people editing their security and bug advisories,
-the incident response time ("we'll handle it one Tuesday next month")
-the afterthought that is MS documentation
-the endless marketing bull that is misleading at best and deceptive at worst
and i could go on, but you get the idea.
Oh, wait, that's Steve Jobs on the phone....
- Just TWO climate committee MPs contradict IPCC: The two with SCIENCE degrees
- 14 antivirus apps found to have security problems
- Feature Scotland's BIG question: Will independence cost me my broadband?
- FTC to mobile carriers: If you could stop text scammers being jerks that'd be just great
- Apple winks at parents: C'mon, get your kid a tweaked Macbook Pro