>>>>Our customer server environments (state/local governments, railroads, medical establishments, and lots of small businesses) are by a very large margin .NET on windows server based. It's rare that someone has any interest in another platform.
>>
>>Bill, your experience is certainly much broader than mine, but I recently deployed an ASP.NET site to Godaddy for a small client and the response time was dismal.
>>I spoke to the people at Goddaddy and they told me that my reponse time would be much better if it weren't done in ASP.NET and they could run the site on their Linux servers.
>>It would also be cheaper.
>>Something to do with the "app pool?"
>>I had used ASP.NET because I was familiar with VS2010 and it was easy to use.
>>
>>It wasn't a big deal, so I redid the site with Dreamweaverr/HTML/CSS/javascript and now it flies on the Godaddy Linux server.
>>
>>Since then I've spoken to several web developers who advise me to avoid ASP.NET for that reason. I think that they have a point. Unless I can see a reason for using ASP.NET for a site, my default choice now will be to avoid it- can't help and might hurt.
>>
>>I also think that the Dreamweaver IDE is slicker than VS2010 so I use that now.
>
>
>Our (my daytime employers') clients either host their own sites or we host them (we have a very good hosting environment). I also host a few web applications for my Kuhn Group customers on my home network or through Web.com.
>
>Speed and uptime are excellent throughout. All are ASP.NET sites on Windows servers.
>
>I'd guess that Godaddy is not giving their .NET hosts the resources they need if they are showing serious performance issues.
>
>YMMV.

Maybe they're spending all their money on Danica Patrick instead of servers ;-)