Important Poll

[mrjanes]

In the words of the old Starkist commercials, "Sorry, Charlie". If it's any consolation, transitioning off of Frontpage is not all that difficult, and you'll wind up with an altogether better and more usable web site as a result.

What you don't know is some of us do know how to use Dreamweaver or even code, me included. It's a matter of preference and case by case - nothing more, nothing less. There are people who see value in things others too readily dismiss. It's unfortunate because so many people will regrettably be forced to look elsewhere for hosting. And, as anyone who consults in IT should know, just because you know something doesn't mean it's a good fit for everyone. I'd love to discuss this more with you but like some students, sometimes you just can't reach them - and I'm off to find a more accommodating host.

 

[Corey]

Just like to point out that nothing has been decided yet. This is a poll so we can better gauge what is important to people.

 

[masshuu]

I say drop it. Ive been poking the issue with a stick as much as i can but i can't get it to do anything
Also i have hardly seen anyone ask about it, maybe like 4-5 people in the past month, compared to how many people who sign up?

 

[johnnygaddaar.cs58]

If this will help in improving Performance of Server then Of Course, DROP THIS !!!!!!

I've used ASP.NET once a time, but found PHP much and much better and easy to learn.

So My VOTE ---> DROP ASP.NET !!!!!!!!

 

[isaac008]

Considering they are becoming out-dated this will force people to use more technological advanced things. Can't be stuck in an obsolete age can we? Also, it'd put resources to better use.

Short: Drop them.

 

[nandifamily]

Forget both Frontpage and ASP.NET. I would like to see Python here instead.

 

[rabbid10]

I say drop them as well, especially if they are a hassle to maintain.

 

[callumacrae]

Forget both Frontpage and ASP.NET. I would like to see Python here instead.

http://x10hosting.com/free-hosting-comparison

Theres a certain way to run it though, I can't remember how.

~Callum

 

[knightbob]

I did used FP before, but I did upload the website be me self, bicose I dint believe in the FP extension, and I also never use ASP.NET, so I vote remove.

 

[marvso]

If they are causing issues or preventing progress, I say drop 'em. I'm sure there are better alternatives for people to use.

 

[masshuu]

Forget both Frontpage and ASP.NET. I would like to see Python here instead.

http://com.x10hosting.com/test.py
http://com.x10hosting.com/test.pysource

.htaccess file: AddHandler cgi-script .py

Considering they are becoming out-dated this will force people to use more technological advanced things. Can't be stuck in an obsolete age can we? Also, it'd put resources to better use.

Short: Drop them.

asp.net isn't outdated at all.

 

[nandifamily]

Thanks for telling me how to use python. That's cool!

And if any proprietary programming language is hurting our service then its better to remove it and use something else.

I used to use Frontpage extensions long ago, but once I switched over to Website Baker, I didn't need it anymore.

 

[charloncabezon63]

!!
bien!

 

[echo8era]

Personally, I signed up because of the ASP.NET support. Not too many free hosts out there who support it.

 

[manuelschreurs93]

I signed up because of asp.net, so I would really like to keep it and get it working again.

 

[mikefox]

Drop them both. Frontpage sucks. M$ only made one decent tool for writing HTML and it was called "Notepad."

 

[DeathByNukes]

I don't use ASP.NET right now but I think it's really cool to have a free host supporting it. I think the option of using .NET should be kept open. Doesn't ASP.NET, a compiled language, potentially offer better performance than PHP?

I vote for removing frontpage extensions if removing that while keeping .NET will help any. Removing FP doesn't lose any actual hosting capability.

 

[lebiakhon]

If support is good, and offered for free, why don't keep it? ASP would be nice.
Regards

 

[essellar]

Doesn't ASP.NET, a compiled language, potentially offer better performance than PHP?

It's not compiled in the sense you think it is. That is, the "machine code" (Intermediate Language) produced doesn't run on the server iron, it runs in a virtual machine. In that sense, it is more like Java byte code on a Java virtual machine. The compilation process merely allows a certain level of language agnosticism for the developer -- you can write in environment-specific dialects of just about any language (VB.NET, C#, F#, Delphi.NET, COBOL.NET, and so on) and they all compile to a common set of instructions for the CLR (common language runtime).

In a rich client (Windows) application, you can get relatively good performance out of the runtime. On the web, not so much. Loading and unloading EXEs and DLLs can be expensive, and the strategy that MS settled on to emulate statefullness (the ViewState) is, um, inelegant (he said, trying to stay somewhat polite).

All that being said, it's rarely the code that's the bottleneck in a well-written application. That title belongs to database activities and/or file I/O. (You can be code-bound if you're generating large images on the fly or have an unnatural lust for bubble sorts on large data sets and so on.) When you actually are code-bound, then doing actual compilation (not compilation to an intermediate language) will make a difference. And if you find yourself with another Facebook on your hands, then you can do what Facebook did -- use a PHP compiler.

 

[DeathByNukes]

Yes, I know about .NET's VM and MSIL/CIL, but the IL is a lot closer to the final product than human readable languages and it compiles it to native code as it runs. Not everyone needs performance on their websites, but people who need to run more intensive operations can probably use this to keep themselves under the suspension limit.