“Once again, you are long on insults and short on content – the exact opposite of Clarence Moon’s post.”

So true. Call it anything you want. Your opinion isn’t worth she it to me.

Doesn’t that make you a “pansy” ?

Once again, you are long on insults and short on content – the exact opposite of Clarence Moon’s post. So you lost this little “battle”.

You wouldn’t have written anything on this post if I hadn’t goaded you. You are a wuss. You choose your battles here at Robert Pogson’s blog. You can’t defend against all of them. There are too many and many of them are just too difficult.

You are on the down hill slide in the war against FLOSS. At some point Clarence you’ll just have to give up and get on with your life.

Have a nice day.

(BTW, I didn’t read past the first sentence of your post. No need, I’ve read it all before.)

Given the offensive tone of the post, it is clear that Mr. Kozbear intended the definition of “pansies” to mean “sissies” or “unmanly persons” or such. I suspect that he is uncaring of any push-back that would show his homophobic bent.

One benefit to me was my actually looking up the term. I wanted to make sure that some other meaning had not crept into the vernacular since my learning the definition in my youth. “Pansy” still has the meaning it had in the 60s, it appears, but on the same screen was the unfamiliar term “bogan” which might some day be used effectively here.

So, thanks for the opportunity to learn more, Mr. Kozbear!

If you really are soliciting comments on Mr. Pogson’s original post, I can only offer a “So what else is new?” Apache has long dominated internet web serving and unless you need the sophistication of ASP.NET in your business, I suppose it is as good or better than any alternative, including NGINX.

Given the essentially free nature of both web servers and OS software used for web servers, the whole issue of who’s on top is somewhat academic. Microsoft makes money from people who need the ASP.NET environment to support their business layer logic via web services and that is a tidy little market for them, yielding a few billion dollars a year.

I don’t see anything negative vis-a-vis Microsoft for people who do not need such services choosing Linux and/or alternated web servers for their purposes. To pay for ASP.NET and Windows Server when that is not the case would be silly.

Because the Cult of Microsoft know when they will have a hard time defending Microsoft. And it will only get harder guys.

I guess you were hoping to let this one slide by. What a bunch of pansies.