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

[Troy Montour]

Tony,
    The thing with ASP or Cold Fusion is its easyier to set-up templates and
manage changes when you do have to make them.

1. I push for the databse side of it more because I can go to the database
make a text tweak with out even touching or uploading anything and the page
changes.

2. pages on the server are not neccesarly faster. it all depends on the
server for loading.

neither is oh my you shouldn't do that. its more a personal thing.

one do you like going to every page and fixing that link or do you like to
go to one spot and fix it and it changes on every page.

Hope this helps.
Troy Montour
Vampires Inc
vamp at vampiresinc.com
612.867.6831
763.586.0552
http://www.vampiresinc.com

----- Original Message -----
From: "Tony Crockford" <tonyc at boldfish.co.uk>
To: <thelist at lists.evolt.org>
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2002 3:31 PM
Subject: RE: [thelist] ASP/open source/static/dymanic sites pro's and con's


> >>2. Dynamic versus static sites
> >
> >DYNAMIC! DYNAMIC! DYNAMIC! DYNAMIC! DYNAMIC!
>
>
> Thanks, but is this simply because using templates and a database is
easier
> maintenance?
>
> If I use templates and a database to produce a static site is this a
better
> or worse solution?
>
> Given that the data isn't time sensitive ( no-one is updating it minute by
> minute)  isn't it better to have all the pages there on the server?
>
> I think I'm hearing you right, but I'm looking for a compelling reason to
> implement IIS and ASP when I'm starting from scratch.
>
> Anyone?
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Tony
>
>
> --
> For unsubscribe and other options, including
> the Tip Harvester and archive of TheList go to:
> http://lists.evolt.org Workers of the Web, evolt !