2009/2/9 Andrew Ballard <aballard@xxxxxxxxx>: > On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 11:10 AM, tedd <tedd.sperling@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> At 10:02 AM -0500 2/9/09, Andrew Ballard wrote: >>> >>> On Sun, Feb 8, 2009 at 3:37 PM, Paul M Foster <paulf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> wrote: >>> >>> > Perhaps a better question then might be how many IIS servers are there >>>> >>>> out there compared to Apache. Apache servers uniformly support PHP, but >>>> I think only IIS servers support ASP (I could be wrong). >>> >>> We're running PHP under IIS where I currently work. For that matter, >>> I'm pretty sure the headers spit out that both ASP.NET and PHP are >>> supported on these machines, even though we're not currently using >>> ASP.NET. >> >> So using IIS v Apache is not a good measure for trying to determine php and >> asp numbers, right? >> >> Cheers, >> >> tedd > > Probably not. For that matter, ColdFusion under both IIS and Apache on > either Windows or Linux (though the only couple installations I've > seen have been on Windows/IIS). You could get a reasonable ballpark > from something like netcraft, but I think Stuart is right on the money > when it comes to the problems you'll have with margin of error. For > that matter, I wonder how useful some of the newer smashups I've seen > like builtwith.com really can be, if sites are configured to hide the > headers that identify the server software and/or supported languages. builtwith.com actually state on their site that "many sites report PHP usage even if it is not being used" so they know their methods are not at all accurate. In fact for two of the sites I maintain it's way off because they don't expose the use of PHP or Apache. -Stuart -- http://stut.net/ -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
