Problems with FP extensions upgrade...is this correct ?

[NZed]

Heres a reply I had from my webhost.

Asking to upgrade their FP extensions to 2002...as all the FP features dont
work.

"We have no plans to update the Front page extensions on the Freeparking
servers, as the secruity patches for these servers cannot be used
(cobalt raq4i), however its something we may look at doing in the future
and will do if we can, as it does benifit everyone. There are a few
features in Frontpage2002 that will not work on the Frontpage2000
extensions, overall most things work fine, and we do have a few customer
that are using Frontpage2002 and its working fine.
If you really need the Frontpage2002 extensions webfarm offers these on
all there server http://www.webfarm.co.nz/
We can upgrade you to the Mirco account and transfer a credit over to
webfarm for the time left you have on your hosting account."

Is this correct ....security patches for these servers cannot be used !
Surely there is a simple solution.

Any comments and feedback welcome....so I can give feedback to my webhost.
I have a feeling they are trying to upsell to me !

NZed

 

[chris leeds]

they've got kind of a yucky server *imho
when you go looking for a new host make sure they put you on a windows
server and all your problems will disappear. it worked for me

 

[shooby]

Coppertop,

The trouble is, no serious web developer in the world uses any Microsoft
stuff, well ok, a few of us use frontpage to manage webs, its ok for that
sort of -- things to do, tasks, its ok for. As a HTML editor its a piece of
junk, and no one uses it, they use dreamweaver. For a web server, most use
Apache or its derivatives, IIS is just too easy to hack, and most people
dont have time to continually install patches, as you have learned.

As to frontpage server extensions, if you actually use that stuff you'll
find its a continual effort to keep working, requiring checks to Microsoft
every 6 months or so to pay for the software to fix the bugs they left in,
and introduce new incompatible, non-standard stuff with bugs, mostly with an
idea to keep the checks coming in from you. There are FPSE for other
systems, but Microsoft spends its time trying to make sure its real hard to
get them to work there, for the obvious reasons, and frankly people
responsible get sick of it and 'cant install the patches' again as you have
learned.

If you just want to use the hit counter, ok, thats cool. The rest, your a
lazy bum who deserves all the trouble Microsoft can SELL you. Just ask
anyone who invested in OLE, then MFC, then COM, and now .NET -- its just a
series of checks to Microsoft. Innovative no?

This other fellow tells you to 'get it on a Microsoft server and all your
problems will go away' -- actually, its just the opposite, your troubles
have only begun. If Microsoft wanted to make good stuff as opposed to just
make money, you wouldnt even be here.

Be a man, learn perl, or php, http:www/w3.org or something with a half life
greater than 6 months.

shoobs

"Get a GUI" http://themes.freshmeat.net/browse/56/?topic_id=56


..

 

[chris leeds]

you're supposed to put IMHO or IMO when you type something so ridiculous.

 

[Paul Taylor]

you're supposed to put IMHO or IMO when you type something so ridiculous.

The views below are not ridiculous. They are the views of the
overwhelming majority of professional designers. The answer is to
avoid anything that requires FrontPage extensions.

You may be aware that over 65% of all web servers are Apache, NOT
Windows IIS.

Paul Taylor

Paul Taylor
http://www.technocurve.co.uk

 

[chris leeds]

that's because on if free and the other you've got to pay. I don't see why
all these people get their panties in a bunch with the M$ stuff and the "how
evil" etc. ad nauseaum. I'm more than willing to pay for anything that
makes me money. I'd rather have ease of deployment and extensions that
work. if I'm using FrontPage and need the extensions for form results or
nav, or even for some publishing features that are overlooked, I pay. I
don't mind it. paying a couple of bucks more to put FrontPage on a windows
machine that is understood and updated by the admins is the way to go. if
the extra couple of bucks for this type of hosting is something that people
refuse to do than I guess they get what they pay for.
IMHO ;-)

 

[ufo_hk]

You may be aware that over 65% of all web servers are Apache, NOT

Windows IIS.

You need to put this into context, maybe 65% of servers are Apache. But 65%
of the top 500 companies certainly don't use Apache. In my experience a vast
majority of the corporate clients I deal with use IIS / coldfusion or
similar servers. The SME market are customers who are looking for low cost
shared solutions and hence they tend to be the one using Apache / PHP or
other low cost solutions, the "free" component of this means they are low
cost.

As a developer I will work with the client to develop a solution which best
meets their needs and this includes using Frontpage or any other solution
which meet their needs in the best possible way.

 

[ufo_hk]

If a hoster isn't going to meet your needs, then go somewhere else. Their
are enough hosters who are willing to provide a good level of support to
their customers.
If you have functionality on our site which uses components only available
on FP2002 extensions then your hoster should supply the service. Someone who
recommends going somewhere else, has trouble with spelling and won't provide
you the features you need is probably not going to be around long.

Since it looks like your probably after an NZ hoster consider webdrive.co.nz
in addition to webfarm. I have a couple of sites there using specific FP2002
features.

HK