Re: www.microsoft.com sure needs a lot of silicon

Kevin P. Neal (kpneal_at_pobox.com) wrote:
: Paul David Fox <pfoxSPAMOFF_at_lehman.com> wrote:
:
: >Steve Cole wrote:
: >>
: >> On Wed, 23 Apr 1997, Paul David Fox wrote:
: >>
: >> > is too heavyweight. (Do the Unix community have a decent alternative
: >> > to perl yet?, hint hint!).
: >>
: >> Yes. Python, Pike, TCL/TK, at least one other.
 

: >I take it that you are joking, right? Hahahaha.
 

: >I have nothing against Python, I dont know Pike, and I have
: >nothing against TCL.
 

: >But do you seriously think that a Unix box forking
: >off processes on every HTTP request is going to compete with
: >the DLL-deranged NT machines?
:
: This is why mod_perl was invented. Also, mod_perl exposes the Apache
: API to the perl scripter.
:
: Anyway, there is also PHP/FI for scripting inside the server. As well
: as just going ahead and using the Apache C API.
:

So now you've choosen my Web server for me. Say I don't want to run Apache? Say I want to run the web server that comes free with Solaris 2.6? (ok when it ships in August...). Or Netscape's?

I got to admit until Paul brought it up I never really thought about the heavyweight vs. dll thing. You could always substitute the word thread for fork but it's still overhead compared to a dll call.

: >I wish Solaris 2.6 luck in its battle against NT 5.x, because that
: >is the only serious Unix operating system left. (Linux probably
: >comes second).
:
: Huh?
:
: Where are you from?
:
: Do you actually believe that Solaris and Linux are it? Why?

Those are the only modern UNIX's with market share I can think of, and to compete against NT you'll need to be commercial, so skip Linux.

What's that leave? :^)

Sun is on a roll with this Java/internet thing, and hopefully Solaris will ride the wave. Received on Thu Apr 24 1997 - 00:00:00 CDT