Return-Path: Delivered-To: new-httpd-archive@hyperreal.org Received: (qmail 3060 invoked by uid 6000); 16 Jan 1998 01:51:23 -0000 Received: (qmail 3053 invoked from network); 16 Jan 1998 01:51:20 -0000 Received: from valis.worldgate.com (marcs@198.161.84.2) by taz.hyperreal.org with SMTP; 16 Jan 1998 01:51:20 -0000 Received: from localhost (marcs@localhost) by valis.worldgate.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id SAA12267 for ; Thu, 15 Jan 1998 18:51:18 -0700 (MST) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 1998 18:51:17 -0700 (MST) From: Marc Slemko To: new-httpd@apache.org Subject: Re: Apache holds just under 50% of the Internet Server Market! In-Reply-To: <199801160147.UAA15919@devsys.jaguNET.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: new-httpd-owner@apache.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: new-httpd@apache.org On Thu, 15 Jan 1998, Jim Jagielski wrote: > Silly? Nah... > > He sounds like someone who doesn't really know what he's talking > about, and people questioned him about it, so he felt the need to > prove that yes indeed he _does_ know what he's talking about... > But, of course, he doesn't. > > As an example, that whole bogus thing about Apache being "freeware" > yet "disk space isn't free" is almost too stupid to be believable. I guess he didn't get in on the free offer of free hardware with Apache, just like every other vendor gives you. His argument about the biggest costs coming after the purchase is very true in concept and I agree completely; if Apache were exactly the same but it cost $$$ (even though it really couldn't be exactly the same and cost $$$...) it would still be worthwhile in my view. When I have an important server depending on the software, I sure don't want to be saddled by some dumb vendor taking weeks or months to do anything, even about major problems.