rec.autos.simulators

> Hi,

> This topic is probably started because of the slowness of BHMS, so therefor
> I think I should say something on behalf of BHMS.

> As the PHP dude for BHMS, I can say the things mentioned above do not apply
> for us :-)
> We're using PHP and Mysql on an Apache server, so nothing MS related ;-).
> The normal parse time of the BHMS website should be less then 1 second and
> load time including images around 5 seconds depending on your connection
> speed.

> We currently have some server issues, which we are investigating and trying
> to solve.
> These issues unfortunately does also affect some of our hosted websites.

> All I can say is at the moment, that these problems will be solved ASAP.

> says...
> > Well I would like to hear some comments on eRacer Garage.  Good or Bad
:-)
> > The site is certainly not complete but we are working hard to get things
> > added and ensure links are both working and relevant.
> > Please take a look and let us know what you think or if you have good
info
> > you would like to share please pass it along.

> > As for the issue of speed on most sim sites I think most are correct in
> > saying its an issue of cost.  Most are run out of the pocket of the
person
> > developing them and thus are not able to compete with larger sites that
have
> > high speed stable connections as those cost $$$.  I think everyone does
> > their best to make the sites accessible but I too agree many are slow to
> > load and updated.

> > http://schooner.gotdns.com/eracer

> "This page cannot be displayed."

> It took 30 seconds to display, and it's kinda short on content. I
> didn't see anything aboyt any driving sims. :)

> > FYI - The use of .NET and XML would have little impact on the loading
time
> > of a page.  In fact .NET should make pages faster as most of the actual
code
> > is now compiled on the server and is generated server side.
> > I agree that not all pages are optimized for sure but this cannot all be
> > blamed on companies like MS.  It's up to the developer to make proper
use of
> > the tools.  Sometimes people's biases against companies like MS
sometimes
> > override reality.  I use MS tools daily for development and like
anything
> > they have good and bad points, it's up to the developers to make the
best
> > use of them to meet the needs of the end users.

> It *is* up to the programmers. But the problem is that most of the
> sites we're talking about are NOT created by professional
> programmers, under a budget (time AND money), or with proper
> forethought or fundamental design.  They only see the "oohh-ahh"
> stuff, and fail to realize that their web server might be throttled,
> or just plain inadequate for what they want to do.  Many times, they
> try to get away with using "free" web space, and often fall victim to
> bandwidth required to display pop-up ads, banners, and poorly
> implemented anti-intrusion code on those servers.

> These problems don't prevent them from implementing crappy
> java/javascript, questionable ActiveX controls, or requiring Flash,
> Quicktime, RealPlayer, or WindowsMediaPlayer.  Most of the people
> that "code" web pages don't have even the hint of a freakin clue, and
> once the page is up, they don't periodically check to make sure the
> links they included still work.

> I have over 50mb of hand-coded graphics-intensive web pages on my web
> site and there is  nothing but pure HTML in use, and they're damn
> fast.  I fail to see the attraction to the java/javascript,
> ActiveXcrement, Flash, .NET, or XML, and 99% of the web sites out
> there don't need any of that ***either.  If they didn't use it,
> their sites would be that much faster and easier to navigate.

> I am not a fan of Microsoft because they push this ***out and try
> real hard to convince people that it'll be a "good thing" (tm) if
> they adopt it.  This shit is nothing more than an end-run around the
> various standards committees, and as a practice it only hurts US -
> the end users.  I don't appreciate it, and it pisses me off to be
> FORCED to enable inefficient and unsecure web "features" (and I use
> that term VERY lightly) in my browser just to view a few personal web
> pages about the sims I drive.

> Well I would like to hear some comments on eRacer Garage.  Good or Bad :-)
> The site is certainly not complete but we are working hard to get things
> added and ensure links are both working and relevant.
> Please take a look and let us know what you think or if you have good info
> you would like to share please pass it along.

> As for the issue of speed on most sim sites I think most are correct in
> saying its an issue of cost.  Most are run out of the pocket of the person
> developing them and thus are not able to compete with larger sites that
have
> high speed stable connections as those cost $$$.  I think everyone does
> their best to make the sites accessible but I too agree many are slow to
> load and updated.

> http://schooner.gotdns.com/eracer

> > Almost every site I go to seems sloooow. I can hit on 200 sites in a
day,
> > and the only slow ones (and I mean really sloooow) will be the auto sim
> > sites.

> > David G Fisher