What do you value most in software quality?

zzz2496 said:

If you know Apache HTTP server, that's my ideal software...

1. Very efficient
2. Very safe
3. Very standard compliant
4. Very scalable
5. Very expandable
6. Very stable
7. Cross Platform/Ubiquity
8. It doesn't have UI
9. It doesn't need GUI
10. Uses .conf files (how in the world Windows programmers NOT use .conf files).
11. OPEN SOURCE and TRULY FREE !!!!

zzz2496

I have the answer for #10. That is because Microsoft made a decision long ago to go with the Registry for software settings so that you could control the settings. Was that the best way to go, maybe not, but they wanted to get away from .INI files so you could have more security. Mind you this is before NTFS existed. Now with NTFS you can control access to files and achieve the same thing as the registry. So it is not as big deal. A programmer can use an .INI or .CFG or .CONF file is does not matter. You can then place the correct security on the file and achieve the same security as the Registry. However since this is not MS standard or practice you will be outside the norm.

I didn't brought up "Uses .conf files" as security - I brought it up because I feel it's MUCH EASIER to work with than any MS's current product offering...
See, I can change some configuration of Apache by editing it's .conf file, save the file - send message to the whole network that the web server is going down in a minute, and will be up in no time, everything done through console, over SSH, encrypted, very secure, and bandwidth efficient. MS's IIS, I'd need to remote desktop to it, requiring me at least have a GUI based client, and have a RPD compatible client, connect to the server, waste all that bandwidth for all those not so shiny GUI, open MMC snap-in for IIS, change some config, save, sending messages to everyone that the web server is going down in a minute and will be up in no time. I don't know if RDP can be encrypted to the level of SSH, I don't really care - I live in a country where broadband internet access costs an arm and a leg (and probably some of your babies too). So bandwidth efficiency is by far Apache's advantage, just by enabling ".conf" file...

zzz2496

zzz2496 said:

I didn't brought up "Uses .conf files" as security - I brought it up because I feel it's MUCH EASIER to work with than any MS's current product offering...
See, I can change some configuration of Apache by editing it's .conf file, save the file - send message to the whole network that the web server is going down in a minute, and will be up in no time, everything done through console, over SSH, encrypted, very secure, and bandwidth efficient. MS's IIS, I'd need to remote desktop to it, requiring me at least have a GUI based client, and have a RPD compatible client, connect to the server, waste all that bandwidth for all those not so shiny GUI, open MMC snap-in for IIS, change some config, save, sending messages to everyone that the web server is going down in a minute and will be up in no time. I don't know if RDP can be encrypted to the level of SSH, I don't really care - I live in a country where broadband internet access costs an arm and a leg (and probably some of your babies too). So bandwidth efficiency is by far Apache's advantage, just by enabling ".conf" file...

zzz2496

Sounds like you come from an *IX environment which is fine, however if you are really working with IIS you can do the same, you can remote to the machine via, Telnet, SSH, a Command Prompt, network share etc. etc. and do the same thing. As well if Apache is running on a Windows Box.

I think the OP was talking about software in general; I was just covering why MS uses the registry instead of configuration files. Either way you can edit remotely as needed without the GUI if you wish.

WindowsStar said:

zzz2496 said:

I didn't brought up "Uses .conf files" as security - I brought it up because I feel it's MUCH EASIER to work with than any MS's current product offering...
See, I can change some configuration of Apache by editing it's .conf file, save the file - send message to the whole network that the web server is going down in a minute, and will be up in no time, everything done through console, over SSH, encrypted, very secure, and bandwidth efficient. MS's IIS, I'd need to remote desktop to it, requiring me at least have a GUI based client, and have a RPD compatible client, connect to the server, waste all that bandwidth for all those not so shiny GUI, open MMC snap-in for IIS, change some config, save, sending messages to everyone that the web server is going down in a minute and will be up in no time. I don't know if RDP can be encrypted to the level of SSH, I don't really care - I live in a country where broadband internet access costs an arm and a leg (and probably some of your babies too). So bandwidth efficiency is by far Apache's advantage, just by enabling ".conf" file...

zzz2496

Sounds like you come from an *IX environment which is fine, however if you are really working with IIS you can do the same, you can remote to the machine via, Telnet, SSH, a Command Prompt, network share etc. etc. and do the same thing. As well if Apache is running on a Windows Box.

I think the OP was talking about software in general; I was just covering why MS uses the registry instead of configuration files. Either way you can edit remotely as needed without the GUI if you wish.

You can edit IIS's config file over console session? Wow, I don't know that... I'll keep a note on it, thanks :)

zzz2496

zzz2496, you are most welcome.