Webhost needed for Classic ASP based sites
-
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.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@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.
No, it does not, but i was replying to the recommendation as an option.
-
@JaredBusch said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@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.
No, it does not, but i was replying to the recommendation as an option.
I see, sorry.
-
.NET 1.0 it looks like so all the way back
-
@GregoryHall ASP.NET is not ASP in any way. That's a completely separate technology that replaced ASP (see the rant Jared complained about in this thread - one of the risks of ASP is that many people use it as incorrect slang for ASP.NET.)
-
I'd recommend going with Host gator for Classic ASP. You can use either MySQL or MSSQL db's as well. http://www.hostgator.com/windows-hosting
-
@thecreativeone91 said:
I'd recommend going with Host gator for Classic ASP. You can use either MySQL or MSSQL db's as well. http://www.hostgator.com/windows-hosting
Good to know. Having Classic ASP with MS SQL must set them apart a bit.
-
@JaredBusch said:
Which of these would you all recommend for a classic ASP based website?
None, I would update my code.
Really, the only ones I know who did classic old school ASP are NetFirms and Enterhost. NetFirms pissed me off by not fixing shit in less than a month, Enterhost was pretty good but I think they got away from shared web hosting.
-
Had a good meeting with the potential client. We are going to bring them a quote to migrate three of their 15+ websites to modern hosting.
Their stuff is really really old. The content though at least gets fairly decent updates. So moving things up to new standards and using some responsive web design is going to seem like night and day to them.
Our developer likes Foundation and ASP.net, so I expect it to be done that way.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@GregoryHall ASP.NET is not ASP in any way. That's a completely separate technology that replaced ASP (see the rant Jared complained about in this thread - one of the risks of ASP is that many people use it as incorrect slang for ASP.NET.)
I agree that anything written in Classic ASP needs to be replaced. There is really is no justification for not keeping things more up to date than 15 years ago design standards.
Thanks for the rest of you bringing suggestions. We will be reviewing their 3 chosen sites over the next couple days.
-
For those wonder why keeping up to date matters.... not only are there issues like security concerns (not patches since the 90s!!) and the concerns that all support for it will drop. But there are software concerns like investing in technical debt or finding that hosting options like what we see here, erode over time. Even those MS still provides the code to allow you to run ASP, you slowly lose freedom over time as fewer and fewer people and businesses find it economically valuable to keep supporting the platform.
