httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Marc Slemko <>
Subject odd pcworld article
Date Tue, 03 Mar 1998 07:45:41 GMT

(old, but just put on the web.. I think.  Perhaps.  Perhaps not.
) includes Apache.

They do hands-on testing of two servers, but pick IIS on NT4
for both servers!??  What sort of dope are they smoking?  Looking
at IIS on NT4 is great and I have no complaints about that.  Not looking
at each server you review is ok, but means the review has almost no 
meaning because you can't do anything except BS about other servers.
WTF pick two NT4 servers?  Shows where their mind is.  Not impressed.

Interesting quotes;

  In addition to these two offerings, Cisco Systems markets the Micro
  WebServer, a version of Twister with a Zip drive as its primary
  storage.  And Data General has announced several Web server models.
  One is small enough to be embedded in a teddy bear, which the
  company has publicly demonstrated. (We are not making that up.)

They say:

  At the high end, products such as Apache, Netscape's Enterprise
  Server, Microsoft's Internet Information Server, and Novell's Web
  Server can handle high traffic volumes.

...and have an interestingly pointless table about what servers
are suitable for what sites.

Holy fscking crap.  They talk about Apache 1.02!?!?  Either they
are really on dope or they can't type and don't even do trivial
things like read what they wrote.  Of course, I don't think they
actually used any server other than IIS so what does it matter...

Seesh, "Security: none".  Erm... whatever.

Kewl.  They have a "reader service number" for Apache.  Hmm, I'll see what
they send me.  <g>

They say:

  The classic commercial Web server is a UNIX box with a hefty price
  tag. Such machines run most of the high-volume public sites, but
  they're under attack in smaller sites by an army of Intel-based
  servers, usually running Windows NT Advanced Server software.

Perhaps they are under attack by this army of Intel-based servers
(and I wouldn't argue with that), but I find it hard to comprehend
how you can say NT is most of these when Apache is still the fastest
growing web server on the Internet according to Netcraft.  Some of
those copies of Apache will be on NT, but not that many yet simply
because it still sucks.

This pile of crap is even worse than the normal junk.  Normally, 
the press just doesn't completely understand what is going on and 
listens too much to marketing.  This entire story, however, is made
up of obviously clueless people spouting about what the little world
they built in their basement looks like without caring about the 
real world.  They don't actually _say_ anything in their entire 

The people at ZD seem pretty damn smart, even in their dumb articles,
compared to these folks.

also, a bit in:

mentioning Apache.

View raw message