I admit I’ve never built a site using ASP and I know nothing about .NET.Â But today someone asked a question in the WebProWorld forum about why a site might have been built in .ASP in the first place and I found one of the answers interesting.
Poster kgun said this (quoting here):
- Static (X)HTML pages. No need for server scripting lik asp or php.
- Static XML driven sites, like an XML CMS. No need for server scripting lik asp or php. XML driven sites can be great, since you can transform the same datasource (XML files) to different formats, HTML, PDF, WAP (for wireless applications), other XML formats like RSS and Atom etc. by using XSLT (Extensible Stylesheet Transformation Language). That makes XML driven sites very flexible. These technologies can of course be combined with the technologies mentioned below. That is the future and what I call web-, internet- or net 2. I am sure some webmasters are already writing all their sites in XML and trasforming it to (X)HTML by using XLST if / when needed. Note, you can get problems with older browsers with XML driven sites depending on how you transform the source file(s).
- Dynamic database driven sites. Then you need a server scripting language like asp or php.
This was good – it’s something I can show my clients when they ask.
I have one client with a nice static site that was built in HTML 4.0 Transitional and is hosted on a Windows server. There’s no need for any server-side scripting on this site, and thus especially no need to be hosted on Windows rather than Linux, am I correct?