Talk:Resin Server

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Java (Rated Stub-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Java, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Java on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Stub-Class article Stub  This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Resin "hobbyist" version[edit]

Caucho's own marketing materials describe Resin Open Source as a web server for "hobbyists". This isn't about "picking on" Resin, it's about accurately describing it. Especially if Caucho is going to do things like release performance metrics without explicitly saying whether they apply to the paid version or the version with caching ripped out. --❨Ṩtruthious andersnatch❩ 21:49, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

April 1st edits[edit]

I'm hoping that more slavish rewriting of the article is an April Fools joke but in case it isn't, I'm going to point out here that "crippleware or open core" is a false dichotomy; it matters not a whit whether the remaining functionality arrived at by disabling features is coherent enough to be called a "core" or is more haphazard, "open core" is simply a euphemism for crippleware.

Likewise, it's completely irrelevant what the performance or feature set of Apache or any other product is; there is no comparison with competitors that magically does away with the fact that Caucho has developed a product, marketed the product's features alongside claims about being open source, documented those features and included configuration options for them everywhere, and then crippled the product to remove those features so that when activated instead of working as described the product urges its user to enter into Caucho's sales pipeline and register for an "evaluation license" and loads of marketing spam. --▸∮truthiousandersnatch 03:16, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Redaction[edit]

The whole article seems like a "copy and paste" of the commercial web of the product.

Especially the third paragraph sounds more like a response to criticism that a paragraph to explain the product. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.194.137.210 (talk) 21:59, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

I was about to say that this doesn't seem to be NPoV. -- Resuna (talk) 20:19, 5 February 2014 (UTC)