[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