New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Comments
Probably got sold by a .NET salesman, aka Microsoft shop. Moved to Sharepoint etc.
This might have the reason that IIS is quite fast and ressource saving for static content, which Godaddy is serving for its parked domains.
That test was completed on IIS7. IIS8 is faster still.
I am still extremely sceptical of those results, as a C# developer by trade I did my own tests on this matter when considering the suitability of ASP.Net (I currently develop for the web in PHP). Although granted the test was conducted pretty non scientifically (installing windows + IIS on a KVM, formatting and installing debian + nginx). I never even got close to the same performance.
I suppose configuration probably matters however. I know quite alot of nginx, but not much IIS config. I wonder about this test....
I implore you. Paying for Windows license is worth dealing with IIS and all the related problems?
I can't believe that Nginx on Linux can't outperform IIS on Windows on computer with the same specs.
Ah, yes, setting up and tuning Linux might require some brains. Sorry if this hurt someone's senses.
What? People are not using A-Patch-Ee anymore?
IIS Express is free. IIS 7 and 8 have nothing to do with previous versions and their vulnerabilities. IIS 7 was completely recoded and is from its technicall point of view a completely differently designed product.
I guess there's a reason that bigger companies tend to rely on software where you have a direct contact to the manufacturer. This often includes not only support but also mission critical assistance, meaning re-coding the software (ie. parts of Windows and IIS). Those companies can held MS liable. This is much harder with most Linux distros and the respective software. I don't know if Mr. Igor Sysoev would conclude a contract with a bigger company to be held liable if his nginx creates problems.
GoDaddy back in 2002/2003, did similar -- if your a Netcraft user, you may remember when they decided to go to IIS from Apache, and Apache took something like 50 million hosts loss that month. I think this was also for the same reason, parking pages and other type services were switched over - I am not sure if they switched back in the time since, but I guess they switched to something and then back to IIS now again. All marketing and PR attempts by two dirty brands.
I saw the graphs over there, they state that Windows performs best at everything, i must say, i find that quite perplexing.
Not really. Lighttpd seems to be on equal level regarding the lowest CPU usage. The site just tested the delivery of static content. The result might be quite different when using dynamic content, database interaction etc. Afaik, Apache and nginx -for example- were primarily designed to serve dynamic content and not to have a hight throughput with static content.
Not that I favour IIS -I don't-, personally I prefer Lighttpd on Debian.
Namecheap uses ASP.NET, who cares?
It might be free. Windows, however, isn't. Personally, unless a piece of software is required that can only be run under Windows, I choose another OS.
Oh yes, can held it liable. Our company is a subscriber to MS services. To hold them liable for whatever? You are kidding, really. Just read the EULAs for everything they sell. Their Technet help is just as pathetic, when I tried to ask them questions that can't be find in their knowledgebase, the response was next to useless.
As far as I know, Sysoev does quite a good work of developing and maintaining 'engine X' (nginx). Otherwise, big IT companies wouldn't use that Web server. My experience demonstrates no flaws in nginx design, it never failed on whatever sites/services I installed it.
Also, it's open source. Other conditions equal, I prefer open source.
JMNSHO.
I wasn't referring to a simple subscriber of MS services. I was talking about a real support contract for at least SMEs. You will get customized EULAs and a direct spokes-person (MS Premier Developer). SMEs often also choose so called "systems houses", ie. specialized and MS authorized technicians (MS pinpoint). Those care about the equipment and solve problems, including coding. In both cases the standard EULAs won't apply. You get customized contracts with a different scheme of liability.
I never said I favour IIS.
I have played around with IIS on Win2k8 and I liked some things about it but I would never use it myself. Only makes sense if you are using .NET or silverlight whatever they are changing the name to yet again. For PHP I would never consider. Didn't perform nearly as well as WAMP in my testing and more of a PiTA to set up for that.
TBH, I never used IIS in real life, just for testing. I would also never use it for my personal sites. I prefer Lighttpd on Debian. But mainly because that's what I'm used to.
However, what I like about IIS is, that is allows changes on the level of the site without the need to reload the whole configuration. So you can change setting of one host/site and just reload that specific part. I guess that this might also be a reason for GoDaddy to go with IIS. They host all their parked domains and websites with IIS. So if the client makes changes to the site behind the domain they just need to reload that specific config. Maybe a reason why IIS used less ressources and was given the choice there.
What is 'simple subscriber'? I can't disclose neither contract type, nor anything, due to bunches of NDAs, but it already costs quite much. And if you want anything but hearing voices of pleasant girls citing Technet's articles/reading manuals over phone, here are sample costs.
They alone are more than enough to discourage using their services. I see those OS intrinsics in action, and I would never run mission-critical servers under Windows without using the above custom support (otherwise "we are not liable for anything" merry statement would make you at your own devices when OS/software gets screwed).
For starters, IIS keeps sites configuration in separate files and reloading IIS is the only means to apply the changes (if done outside IIS manager).
When comparing to nginx, 'reload' command has never caused downtime for me even in massive configuration with many virtual servers containers loaded.
Of course, tastes differ, so if someone chooses Windos/IIS and it suites their needs, I can only say "great, you've found the right solution".