[thelist] ASP/open source/static/dymanic sites pro's and con's

aardvark roselli at earthlink.net
Mon Jan 14 15:04:21 CST 2002


> From: "Tony Crockford" <tonyc at boldfish.co.uk>
>
> anyone know of any compelling reasons why a local government office
> should not use ASP? has Microsoft any cunning plans to control it, now
> or in the near future?

we just built a city web site in our CMS based on IIS/NT/MS-
SQL/ASP...  the choice can be easy if the client *prefers* that 
environment...

instead of going by the preferences of others or yours, what has 
the client got to say?  do they build lots of VB apps?  do they use 
Wintel machines?  what other MS products drive their 'business'?

in the end, if they're an NT shop, it's cheaper for them to maintain 
their own site and content if it's in a language they have skills for 
already...

> Would open source PHP/MySQL be better for dynamic sites or would it be
> better still to generate a static site from an offline database?

depends on traffic... for lower bandwidth sites, the db-driven pages 
should be fine... for very high traffic, consider having the db ouptut 
to static pages... analyzing current traffic patterns should give you 
a clear idea of which way you need to go...

> any thoughts on pros and cons of:
> 
> 1. ASP vs. Open source solutions

cost... it may be cheaper for you to implement free software, but if 
the client spends crazy time (money) learning/training on it, 
nobody saves anything...

the pros and cons in a vacuum are one thing (and there are 
many)... the pros and cons with regard to your client, however, are 
a completely different matter...

> 2. Dynamic versus static sites

see previous comments...





More information about the thelist mailing list