Apparently www.linux64.com, obviously a Linux site, is running Microsoft IIS and has been doing so since August 2001...
Hmmm...
http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph/...submit=Examine
Printable View
Apparently www.linux64.com, obviously a Linux site, is running Microsoft IIS and has been doing so since August 2001...
Hmmm...
http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph/...submit=Examine
That's wicked wild crunchy crazy :eek:
My god even Linux sites recognise that OS is stoopid:eek:
I actually never thought it was stupid for the business world, I've always defended it for web servers and such.Quote:
Originally posted by Jethro
My god even Linux sites recognise that OS is stoopid:eek:
You probably know more about it than I do thuogh.
But that's pretty funny.
Linux is a worry, we have a couple of servers setup cause we got to support the software tools on that platform as well. So far out of a huge client database, only one has implemented a Linux solution....cheap bastards.....;)
NT seems to be still behind Unix on the server side of things, except for office tools...
So doesnt prove **** all!!
Proves that perhaps they are getting the site hosted for free but only by IIS servers!
Or thats what he has at home!
Look at redhat.com or vbforums.com or google.com etc etc.
Whoa chill there Beacon, I was just pointing out that it was funny.Quote:
Originally posted by Beacon
So doesnt prove **** all!!
Proves that perhaps they are getting the site hosted for free but only by IIS servers!
Or thats what he has at home!
Look at redhat.com or vbforums.com or google.com etc etc.
What he has at home, this is a company I'm sure.
Yet when MS does it they are grounds for trashing. but it's OK when the world of Linux does it.
Ohh cause Linux is open .... ohhh ..... so every Tom , Dick and Harry can hack it.......
Linux sucks!
I can keep this up all day or until Ray hits me with his Linux manual - man that's a big book
When did MS do it??
Umm, you didn't hear?Quote:
Originally posted by Beacon
When did MS do it??
www.wehavethewayout.com which is something sponsored by MS and Unisys it's like anti-UNIX or something, it was running on Linux for a while. It's now switched to IIS. well actually they did it in such a hurry that they didn't even transfer the site contents, just the host.
Oh now we're going to see how you react to THIS one when the story is turned..."HAHAHHAHAHA Microsoft SUCKS that's so pitiful and lame of them"
Ohhh nope didnt hear that one now it makes sense!!
:p :p ;)
Yep, read about it on [H]ardOCP front page. :)Quote:
Originally posted by Beacon
Ohhh nope didnt hear that one now it makes sense!!
:p :p ;)
I believe MS used to run www.microsoft.com on BSD before they invented IIS.
Yep..Most of the dos network programs like ftp come from the BSD Ports...
Microsoft likes BSD (and BSD Licence but not GPL). But they do have a business to promote.
Can you Imagine them advertising like,
"UNIX Platform (except the BSD flavors) locks you ..."
:p
How long before MS have a go at doing a Linux? They cocked it up trying to do Unix, (Xenix was just horrible)....
well alot more sites have been caught running linux when they SHOULD be running IIS than the other way around
like which ones? There are no sites that SHOULD be running IIS other than ones owned by Microsoft.Quote:
Originally posted by Gandalf_Grey_
well alot more sites have been caught running linux when they SHOULD be running IIS than the other way around
well how bout all the ones that are downing linux? a large percentage of them run apache
Apache also runs on Windows :pQuote:
Originally posted by Gandalf_Grey_
well how bout all the ones that are downing linux? a large percentage of them run apache
Apache is the best web server weather you run it on Windows or Linux.
It probably is but I couldn't set it up. :confused:Quote:
Originally posted by Gimlin
Apache is the best web server weather you run it on Windows or Linux.
I'm using Xitami.
Yah its a ***** to set up.
IIS actually isn't bad if you patch itQuote:
Originally posted by Gimlin
Yah its a ***** to set up.
And it's pretty easy to set up too.
But I don't use it for very high-demand stuff so I just use Xitami, it's simple, small, fast, free, I recommend it :)
i agree... xitami is by far the best server software i have ever used...
Your not joking are you???
Xitami is good for say testing your web pages on your pc but apache is so much more powerful and robust.
The reason you find it so hard is because you need to use command line stuff justin!! And when there was no pretty button to press you got all confused!
;) :p j/king!
Yeah who said I was running a heavy duty web server? It does what I need it to do.Quote:
Originally posted by Beacon
Your not joking are you???
Xitami is good for say testing your web pages on your pc but apache is so much more powerful and robust.
The reason you find it so hard is because you need to use command line stuff justin!! And when there was no pretty button to press you got all confused!
;) :p j/king!
Why do they have to use technology from the 70s. I hate command lines. They should die. :p
Beacon if you want to spread the word of Apache help me set it up sometime..does it run in the background as an NT/2K service
Except for every now and again having to drop down to DOS of course:rolleyes:Quote:
Originally posted by jpbtennisman
Yeah who said I was running a heavy duty web server? It does what I need it to do.
Why do they have to use technology from the 70s. I hate command lines. They should die. :p
Linux actually does have a couple of GUI's to choose from, remarkably they both seem modelled after windows:o
Yeah it has that KDE stuffQuote:
Originally posted by Jethro
Except for every now and again having to drop down to DOS of course:rolleyes:
Linux actually does have a couple of GUI's to choose from, remarkably they both seem modelled after windows:o
I think command lines are old and antiquated...it's like 5 1/4 floppies or 486es, nobody uses them anymore, they were good while they existed, but why can't they just die.
Apple worked this out back in the eighties......with windows later versions you get all the powerful system control stuff in an easy to use form, rather than spending friggin hours hunting through manuals for some obscure command modifier.....
Ya that's what I'm saying if this was something that was obsolete in the EIGHTIES why is it still being used 20 years later??Quote:
Originally posted by Jethro
Apple worked this out back in the eighties......with windows later versions you get all the powerful system control stuff in an easy to use form, rather than spending friggin hours hunting through manuals for some obscure command modifier.....
Coz it's easier for net admins instead of clicking 6 times and waiting for each little picture to be opened etc etc.
I can type cd or cat blah or whatever and you can do many things at once!
KDE and gnome are 2 popular desktops managers for linux!
Justin:
On a windows box hell i've only ever done that once!
Yep you can run it as a service if you want but Apache advise this should be done once installed succesfully as a console!
What windows version?
As a console? :confused:Quote:
Originally posted by Beacon
Coz it's easier for net admins instead of clicking 6 times and waiting for each little picture to be opened etc etc.
I can type cd or cat blah or whatever and you can do many things at once!
KDE and gnome are 2 popular desktops managers for linux!
Justin:
On a windows box hell i've only ever done that once!
Yep you can run it as a service if you want but Apache advise this should be done once installed succesfully as a console!
What windows version?
2K pro.
Console window you know like any other app.
:)
Ok if you want i'll help give instructions or whatever!
Now you have 2 choices Apache 2.0 beta or 1.3.24.
I'd say 2.0 coz it's supposedly easier to install!!
Though it has some bugs your not eactly using it for any real crunching are you?
What u think?
OK sure...I'm all up for new stuff :pQuote:
Originally posted by Beacon
Console window you know like any other app.
:)
Ok if you want i'll help give instructions or whatever!
Now you have 2 choices Apache 2.0 beta or 1.3.24.
I'd say 2.0 coz it's supposedly easier to install!!
Though it has some bugs your not eactly using it for any real crunching are you?
What u think?
Thanks man, and no i'm not using it for advanced stuff..I just mainly host images off of it. And I'd rather run it as a system service.
Too easy:D Mind if it had of been Chit Chat;)Quote:
Originally posted by jpbtennisman
OK sure...I'm all up for new stuff :p
Sorry my computer crashed stupid windows took forever to load. :mad:
Anyways just read-up on 2.0 after i had downloaded it a while back anyways they removed the binaries for it so i think we'll be stuck with 1.3.24!
But thats ok!
Go download apache_1.3.24-win32-x86-no_src.msi from here
Tell me when you've done that!
OK i downloaded it...
Now it asks me for:
- Network Domain
- Server Name
- Administrator's Email Address
I can figure out the last one but network domain and server name...I'm just hosting this off my IP I don't have a domain name. What do I do :confused:
No it should be asking you for Server name, Domain name and administrative email account???????
1 and the same i spose!
Server name = your computer name or ip.
Domain Name = localhost or 127.0.0.1 or leave blank.
email = your email.
OK appears to be successful...it wasn't nearly this easy last time I tell you it sucked!!
http://66.56.105.80/
Now where does it save the content? And how can I change that location?
At the moment it is running from the directory where you installed it to and serving documents from the htdocs directory!
Look in your .conf files for that directory and change it to whatever!
Once you've changed all your options in the .conf we'll get it running as a service!