Webhost needed for Classic ASP based sites
-
@Carnival-Boy said:
Of course. The "bus" issue as you call it is a problem with all legacy applications. We still have dBase III applications in production.
I suspect VBScript is still far more common than you think, though.
We run classic ASP sites here too. We have one on ASP.NET, but most of our intranet site pages are written in classic ASP.
Server 2012 and IIS should be able to support classic ASP.
-
@Carnival-Boy said:
I'm not sure what your point is? Supporting legacy applications is a fact of life for most companies.
That they DO support legacy apps is a fact of life. But lots of companies do things that they don't need to. I'm not saying that keeping ASP in your case is the wrong decision, but keeping it because "lots of companies make bad decisions" isn't a viable reason for it. Yes, most companies support legacy apps. Most companies also go out of business. The two are not related at all. But what "most companies do" is never a good guideline to use.
One of the biggest benefits of a community like this is to be challenged to think about if something is the right way to do things. Is supporting a legacy app something you do because, why not? Or is it the best option? It is six of one, half a dozen of another?
-
@NetworkNerd said:
Server 2012 and IIS should be able to support classic ASP.
Yes, Server 2012 is Windows 8. The last version that Microsoft has stated will support ASP. They've said nothing about dropping support, they have simply only stated that Windows up to 8 would support it.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
Is supporting a legacy app something you do because, why not? Or is it the best option? It is six of one, half a dozen of another?
OK, if that's your point/question, the answer is, as stated above, because it's all I currently know and I'm the only developer here.
Am I planning to replace it with something else? Absolutely.
-
@Carnival-Boy said:
OK, if that's your point/question, the answer is, as stated above, because it's all I currently know and I'm the only developer here.
Am I planning to replace it with something else? Absolutely.
It makes sense, I just wanted to be sure you were thinking about it in terms of "reasons that apply to your situation" and not just because lots of companies were doing it to
(As your mom said, "If all the other companies jumped off a bridge, would you jump off too?")The current risk is that support for ASP might end in as little eight years. Not likely that soon, but possible. Support meaning, in this case, that the last OS on which it is known to be able to run will leave support itself. Similar to if you had a technology that had to run on XP today. Can you do it? Absolutely. Is it supported? Absolutely not.
Leaving support is not the end of the world. ASP itself left support over a decade ago and was already not being updated for many years at that point. And obviously it still works and will for another decade at least. We migrated off in 2005. Took some work as we were 100% ASP at the but SO worth it. We've had a full decade of .NET now. Very thankful that we migrated early, we've reaped the benefits of ASP.NET for a long time now.
-
@Carnival-Boy said:
Am I planning to replace it with something else? Absolutely.
I assume just ASP.NET?
-
Yep. And C#
-
@Carnival-Boy said:
Yep. And C#
Excellent choices. That is exactly what we did. VBScript on ASP on NT 4 to ASP.NET and C# on Windows 2003. The latter is still in production.
-
@scottalanmiller Thanks for completely derailing the thread in your rant about ASP.
That was not f*** [moderated] helpful.
If you read my OP, I specifically stated I was going to recommend a solution to migrate forward after I have everything back up and running as it was prior to being hosed up.
As far as I could tell most of those providers offer windows hosting with IIS. I was wanting recommendations for providers not a entitled rant about ASP.
-
-
So why not try this on Azure.. you should be able to get a trial for 30 days to get the solution proven out.
http://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/pricing/free-trial/?WT.mc_id=azurebg_us_sem_google_br_solutions_nontest_infrastructure_sitelink&WT.srch=1I just logged in and you can still spin up a 2008 R2 SP1 image which is what I would recommend you try for this.
Report back if you need more.
-
@GregoryHall said:
So why not try this on Azure.. you should be able to get a trial for 30 days to get the solution proven out.
http://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/pricing/free-trial/?WT.mc_id=azurebg_us_sem_google_br_solutions_nontest_infrastructure_sitelink&WT.srch=1I just logged in and you can still spin up a 2008 R2 SP1 image which is what I would recommend you try for this.
Report back if you need more.
I thought about Azure, but did not want to deal with spinning up a full server for a temp solution.
It would certainly work though. I am meeting the prospective client in an hour and I will have more information after that to make decisions on how to migrate them forward.
I was looking at shared hosting providers for the zero config and lost cost. Just take their backups and ftp them up, fix the DNS and be done.
-
in what form are the backups in?
-
Azure has shared hosting for websites as well....
-
I'll know that in an hour. Was just told they have them.
I'm pretty much expecting a zip.
-
-
Report back when you find out and we will hash this out together
-
@JaredBusch said:
I thought about Azure, but did not want to deal with spinning up a full server for a temp solution.
Does their web hosting require spinning up VMs? I thought that it didn't.
-
they have a website section that is cheaper than a full server...
-
@GregoryHall said:
they have a website section that is cheaper than a full server...
I have another client on an azure website. I did not think it support classic asp. I will check into that closer.
