Ugh.. these past few days have been a *****. Moving a website from a local server to a dedicated server.. all running server 2003 and any services you could think of.. I've done plenty of moves for people using apache and linux without much hitch. I'm even a Microsoft certified professional and I found this move the most challenging then them all. Of course this is the largest site I've moved and first time dealing with IIS, ms sql, and asp... now I'm just waiting on the DNS to propagate and them I'm sure I'll have some more crap to deal with.

Tell me why a dedicated server that costs you 300 a month but you can't setup ms sql on it. I have to use the hosting companies dedicated ms sql server. When I login, I can see the tables of all the other websites with DBs in that server. Of course I can't view them but this makes it very difficult to navigate through looking for just my tables.

The only cool thing so far, when remote desktop'd to the dedicate server, I was downloading MS sql enterprise manager from MS website.. I got 9megs a second download speed D:

I have no experience with this sort of thing, but I will say this: tomorrow night, Funeral for a Friend are playing a gig at the Liverpool Guild of Students where I work behind the bar. Beat that for job-related suckage

Yet another reason never to go with Windows servers >.>

I also can't understand why they wouldn't have something as basic as SQL on a dedicated server >.>

LOL DON'T WORK THERE THEN, GOD [/massassi]

GOD, DEFINITION OF MASSASSIAN = ******* [/jEDIkIRBY]

Ha Haw! [/Nelson]

haha well it's just contract work so it wont last that long

I think you should talk them into getting a decent host. Seriously, I wouldn't consider that acceptable.

Why would anyone willingly subject themselves to SQL Server?

This is why I laughed when people suggested I go into networking....

Oh, networking is easy, just as long as your not dealing with win32 systems.

I disagree. While I prefer UNIX/Linux for servers, Windows makes a vastly superior desktop operating system.

*cough*fish KIO slave*cough*

Not sure how that differs from a SAMBA server, aside from routability.

It also doesn't solve the problem of Wine not being that great of a program.

Hmm, lets see, single permission level, inherent encryption, key-based authentication...should I go on?



Ive used linux workstations exclusively at the office for over 3 years without resorting to using Wine. Its really not that hard.

When your company develops for a Windows desktop platform, with Windows tools, it is.

And let's not even get into the topic of home use with games.

Actually, we do develop win32 software. My C guy does all his development on an HPUX workstation using nedit (of all things!) and cross-compiles the win32 binaries with gcc on a Slackware box. It works remarkably well.

Neither of us use any Windows tools. We just don't need to.



Yes, lets not. Thats an entirely different issue. My point is that system integration and networking in general is far easier with Linux systems than anything running Windows.

What kind of win32 applications do you develop?

On Windows, the HMI for our current primary product. (screenshots 1,2)

And how the hell do you make sure it works when you don't have a Win32 environment?

The product runs Windows, obviously.

Well, our internal tools for our proprietary scripting language and libraries do.



Try training a 50-year-old nurse who's used a paper-based documentation system her entire life and only uses the computers at the local public library how to use Linux. 99 times out of 100, it won't be pretty nor nearly as easy as Windows.