It's not that bad...
CMSes are good for certain websites, but not for all. Designers will never make their sites with CMS, for example.
XHTML... so many people can't even write a good piece of HTML! It's goin' to take a lot of time...
Hosting... maybe teens don't need it, they can just register a blog, but serious organizations will always need it.
So I disagree will all of your statements, sorry.

Well,

To start off, XHTML isn't exactly 'replacing' HTML, it's a large addition to it.

CMS's aren't needed in small 5 page mom and pop shops, nor are they feasible. This will NEVER change. OF course on larger sites, CMS's are feasible, but still not exactly needed unless larger companies do not want to pay a developer (which they would be stupid to do and try to edit a large website by themselves) haha, oh that would be funny!

Hosting (dead ) , in what way? People will always want to customize their website and have complete control? How and why would this ever change?

Keep it coming.

On some points I agree with Adam and some with Dave but I just wanted to reply to a few point made by Adam

Originally Posted by ADAM Web Design

I don't have to do anything as far as this is concerned. Commercial interests eventually become closed, if they're not already. They have to in order to retain a competitive edge. That's business.

I've used Red Hat Linux since 1999. It hasn't been closed yet and won't be anytime soon. They have a different business model than Microsoft. Red Hat makes money from support and invest a portion of the money they earn back into open source software. As long as you don't use things like their name and logo, you can install Red Hat for free. CentOS does it.

Linux has had a strong steady group of volunteers working on it since 1991. That's 16 years.

Companies buy Red Hat support and run it on servers. I work at the second largest IT outsourcing company in the world and I can tell you first hand there are a lot of companies that use Red Hat. Companies give money to open source projects because it is an investment in their bottom line.

And operating system is only as secure as your network and the security practices you implement.

Originally Posted by ADAM Web Design

You're hitting the bong pipe way too hard if you think that's true. If voting systems were open source, everyone with a political agenda would be going left, right, and center at the systems trying to find a hole, a hack, an exploit, a whatever...and they wouldn't tell anyone if they found it.

With closed source Diebold voting machines, we've put our democracy in the hands of one corporation. Exploits HAVE been found. A group went in and showed how to break into the system and change the votes.

You seem to think that open source means insecure. With Linux you have many volunteers who are professionals trying to find exploits. When one is found it is fixed much much faster than Microsoft or Sun do.

And of course if some cracker found an exploit they aren't going to tell anyone whether that's been done on Linux, BSD, or Windows. Windows is exploited all the time. Closed source doesn't protect it.

Originally Posted by ADAM Web Design

No...what I'm saying is that eventually they will reach a point, as all "open" projects do, where they can't grow anymore because mob mentality kicks in, everyone's self-interests start pulling the projects in different directions, finances and overhead become issues, and there isn't any more room to grow.

I don't think you understand open source or the open source movement. That will happen with "some" projects. The Linux kernel keeps getting better and better and hasn't sucomed to the mob mentality and neither have most open source projects. The GPL is the reason. You can't make changes to the software and distribute it without releasing the source code with those changes. This has been done on some projects and the original developer (who owns the copyright) incorporates them back into the original software. And there still is a copyright owner with most open source software.

Okay, I've written too much and tried to revise it to the best of my ability. Hope I've proofread enough and caught all my mistakes. If not, I'm sure Adam will point them out

You seem to think that open source means insecure. With Linux you have many volunteers who are professionals trying to find exploits. When one is found it is fixed much much faster than Microsoft or Sun do.

That's only because they're still not big man on campus yet. They are for hosting servers in terms of volume, but most sites that run on Linux servers are small sites (like JD pointed out, the 5-page mom and pop sites). Yes, there are large sites that run on Linux servers, but you'd have to know what you were looking for and what you were looking at before you could go at trying to hack it. So they're not really a target, since the risk/reward ratio is relatively high (mostly due to lack of reward) and partly because they're not from Redmond, Washington as well.

As far as the army of volunteers/professionals looking for exploits, this is precisely what makes open source insecure and why it will ultimately hit a glass ceiling. How many professionals? How many volunteers? And how many of those exploits that are found are actually reported back to the excessively trusting community? If you get a rogue professional who reports 90 exploits out of 100 and keeps the other 10 in his back pocket for his own use, guess what? Everyone's screwed, unless some other volunteer comes along with a fix, and then you have to trust THAT volunteer not to go coding a backdoor or some other exploit (inadvertent or otherwise) in.

Let's take this in two other directions:

1) Financial institutions. You go to your bank, where you've been banking for 25 years. Your manager tells you that "we're migrating to an Open Source platform on XYZ Server using ABC Software, which is the #1 software of its kind."

I'll guarantee you that 99 out of 100 of you would yank your money out of that bank so fast it'd make the manager's head spin.

2) Search engines. Let's say Google decided to reveal its source code, which of course includes its algorithm, to everyone.

Anyone who has any knowledge of the SEO industry can see what would happen here. If you don't know anything about the SEO industry, just read Digital Pointless for 2-3 days, listen to the bad advice, and then come back.

The open source movement is a niche movement geared to niche segments of a large market. It's not some giant revolutionary visionary concept or some world-altering idea like most of its proponents seem to think it is. It's a one-size-fits-a-small-percentage-of-sites-and-that's-it movement.

I don't think you understand open source or the open source movement. That will happen with "some" projects. The Linux kernel keeps getting better and better and hasn't sucomed to the mob mentality and neither have most open source projects. The GPL is the reason. You can't make changes to the software and distribute it without releasing the source code with those changes. This has been done on some projects and the original developer (who owns the copyright) incorporates them back into the original software. And there still is a copyright owner with most open source software.

...and bang, eventually the slowdown will occur. Company X wants this change made. Company Y wants this change made. Company Z wants this change made. Five hundred other companies want these changes made. All of them release their source code back, and the original developer has to go through all the examples and either try to somehow satisfy everyone (not likely to happen), give in to vested interests and a select few (mob mentality), do nothing at all (thus grinding things to a halt), or go in their own direction (which would defeat the concept of open source).

Just because it hasn't happened with "most" open source projects doesn't mean it won't happen. It just means it hasn't happened...yet. It will, though...it will have to.

If you're still not convinced, try this exercise: talk to a business owner not involved in a tech industry about Open Source, without mentioning pros or cons. Just explain the concept, as it is (the idea that the source code for a project is published). Watch their reaction to it...it's really rather illuminating.

If we consider your reason for establishing that hosting as concpet is dying hten we can safely say that hosting never lived. Most of the business owners have never cared about the hosting part of their websites, they just want a working website which they can show to their customers. CMS will never replace custom programming, it is custom programming which makes a site interesting or usable or unique in most of the cases.

Bingo, dman. Very well put.

Originally Posted by OSWebMaster

Clients do not care about getting thousands of emails, a huge amount of disk space, etc. They just want an easy way to get up and running online. They just want their website.

I'm probably an exception ... or at least a statistical outlier. But I want about 15 GB to store my original, raw format portfolio pieces. I've got these on a few different computes, external drives, and so on ... but all of them will eventually die, and I want more redundant protection. Trouble is, I don't really trust my host to keep my data safer than I can.

Originally Posted by OSWebMaster

The CMS, WordPress, now has close to 2 million people using the hosted version (at WordPress.com), and at least 1 million more installed on private hosting servers (from WordPress.org). Not to mention JOOMLA, Drupal, and other excellent CMS applications. So, unless someone can show that these numbers are somehow being exceeded by "old-school" websites, then I remain convinced that CMS websites are replacing old-school sites, at a rapid pace.

1. I don't think the numbers you want actually exist anywhere, in aggregate form. Somebody would need to do a census of the web to compile them.
2. I've worked on a lot of aspx and asp systems that use shared components, but almost always used hand-written UI pieces.

Even a cms needs a template, which is x/html under the covers. I don't think this makes sense as a one or the other question ... I see them both living side by side for the foreseeable future.

Hello All -

Interesting debate we are having here. Some CMS points in response to the dialog:

• WordPress is available in an "Enterprise Edition" for larger companies from a service provider named "Know Now".
• A case for WordPress being "infinitely extensible" is being put forward by a techie who's "usually happy to start his projects from scratch" -- see post at "TekArtist."
• Some larger sites run on the WordPress framework include:
  1. Indiana School of Journalism
  2. Ford Auto Show
  3. XXL Mag
  4. MOO.com (ecommerce implementation)
  5. 71Miles.com
• We have clients in 1-5 person businesses who greatly enjoy the ability to write and edit their own pages and posts, via a WordPress installation. They prefer it over "old school" websites where they would have to call the webmaster every time they needed to update an HTML page.
• The Independent "CMSWire", an online journal covering all things CMS, reported that more business people are using WordPress to build their CMS solutions... in this article.

I submit these points as further examples that WordPress is an excellent framework on which to build your web presence, and as further evidence that CMS solutions, in general, are on the rise.

Hosting -- THE CONCEPT -- is dead: BINGO, dman... in fact, Hosting, the concept NEVER did live (meaning never was understood very well), by non techies -- the majority of small business people. CMS, when you show the results, and easy editing, are much better understood.

RISKS/BENEFIT in OPEN SOURCE vs. other solutions: The same risks are in Open Source, as exist in other methods of development (security, support, etc.). The BIG DIFFERENCE, is that you save time and money by starting with a well developed framework that is extensible.

PREDICTION: Within 5 years, "old school" websites will all be replaced by some form of CMS. Why? It's easier for the client.

Regards -
Scott

Originally Posted by ADAM Web Design

... open things grow to the point where the idiots stunt the growth.

Hello All -

Interesting conclusion to a looooooong post.

Questions:

• What real-world examples do you have of this?
• Do you prefer a democracy, or a dictatorship?
• What about the "in between" (in between open source and commercial code) where something starts "open" (take WordPress, for example), and then it is built upon and something commercial with some proprietary additions are offered, like the WordPress Enterprise offering from KnowNow.com? So much for the WordPress is only for "smaller sites" case.

Adam: DIY = the only way to fly for anything serious.

Really? When a good "off the shelf" platform exists, you would fail to take advantage of it, and charge the client for building it from scratch? Or do you charge nothing for recycling your storehouse of proprietary code? Hey... seems like an enriching prospect if you can get your clients to pay for reinventing the wheel.

Finally... maybe since Forum posts are "open" -- your reasoning that idiots stunt growth might actually apply. When certain posters filled with a derogatory spirit, a jaundiced eye, and a pessimists view of the world, join the discussion with an eye toward tearing down, instead of constructive criticism -- it does give one pause about joining in.

- Scott

Originally Posted by OSWebMaster

Hello All -
Finally... maybe since Forum posts are "open" -- your reasoning that idiots stunt growth might actually apply. When certain posters filled with a derogatory spirit, a jaundiced eye, and a pessimists view of the world, join the discussion with an eye toward tearing down, instead of constructive criticism -- it does give one pause about joining in.

Yes I agree. I stopped further discussion on this topic cause it's just not worth my time debating my opinion with others who are so one sided, anti-everyone else & have no real proof of their all inclusive views.

PREDICTION: Within 5 years, "old school" websites will all be replaced by some form of CMS. Why? It's easier for the client.

I think that's overly optimistic. First of all, not all websites are built for clients. Second, not EVERYONE finds things like Wordpress easy. I can guarantee you that people like my sister would struggle with even WP's 'easy 5 minute installation' and would find it impossible to do ANY editing of a WP template - even to change a font size ! So what do people like her do ? They pay people like ME to fix it for them. Not everyone WANTS or NEEDS a CMS platform. This just strikes me as more 'dumbing down' - trying to make it so 'easy' or idiot-proof that, well, any idiot could do it -- until something breaks, and then they need those of us who still know the 'old school' way of doing things. I don't think 'old school' is going away any time soon.

You know those science fiction movies set in the future where people have a lot of amazing technology -- but they have NO idea how it works and haven't the knowledge to fix it if it breaks ?? Well that's what this kind of thing reminds me of.

VERY good call, Diane. Whether we realize it or not, there are some people who just won't get how to use WordPress and its "easy 5-minute installation" process, which really isn't a five-minute process when the additional time required to either create a MySQL database yourself or get it created for you is factored in. External things (which are hosting-specific requirements) still have to be taken care of.

Let's take this in a different direction for a minute. Let's take WordPress or Joomla or Typo3 (by the way...if you really want an example of crap Open Source, try working on Typo3 as a user sometime) or (insert CMS here), throw it into a pretty box, shove it on a Staples shelf, and sell it to Joe Schmuck off the street for $9.95 (hey, ISPs sell their own stuff this way...why can't Open Source people?) What do they do with it from there?

"Requires 1 MySQL database. Okay, what's MySQL? Do I go back to Staples and buy it? Where do I get it from?"

Bang. Average User is stopped right there. But let's assume Average User somehow stumbles and bumbles and finds a host that supports MySQL, or so they claim...which, by the way, is still hosting. So once again, hosting doesn't die as a marketing term. Now Average User has to turn around and either get a domain or if they're lucky get some form of free subdomain hosting or hosting of the form www.host.com/~username-goes-here . Now they have to get the host to set up a MySQL database, which probably won't occur the first time, because Average User will probably do what all of us do at some point and select a crappy host through no fault of their own.

If Average User hasn't given up yet, and somehow gets their blog or website or whatever they're doing set up in crude form, now Average User either has to market the site. No problem, let's find an Open Source plugin to do that...nope, there isn't one. Or Average User wants a custom header for their Wordpress blog, like Diane said...hmmm...let's see...how is the average user going to do that?

Or better yet...Average User starts promoting their blog and the spammers get a hold of it. "No problem, get the Akismet plugin." That's all well and good, except that Akismet has a 95% success rate (from my own blog measurements: it's caught 3004 in the past three months, of which less than half have been revealed to me and may well be false positives, and let through 152). and that 5% that gets through will confuse the average user who won't have the presence of mind to know it's spam and probably go happily letting it through.

I actually had a client ask me two weeks ago about setting up a blog for them and the first question I asked was "who deals with spam and maintenance?"
"What?"
"Who deals with maintenance?"
"What do you mean?"
"Well, someone's got to write the posts for the blog. Who does that?"
"I don't know."
"Okay...that's the minor issue. You can figure that out. Now...who maintains the comments, checks for spam, etc.?"
"About how long would it take?"
"Well, it takes me about 15-30 minutes a day."
"Oh, crap, so it would take us about 3 hours a day, because we don't know what we're doing."

Now...you can blame the fact that it's a blog, and that other open source software may not have this sort of issue because of the fact that blogs allow for commenting, but the comment spam is a microcosm of a much, MUCH deeper issue: blogs are open to everyone, including those who would try to screw with it. Anyone who doesn't think that happens is dreaming or delusional.

There's example 1 of how opening something up to the public stunts its growth, since Scott wanted one. I'm sure you'll misinterpret this or choose to distort it to suit whatever argument you have at the time, but the fact is that because an open door exists, the potential for abuse occurs.

Example 2: www.dmoz.org . They opened the directory up to anyone who wanted to edit it would at least have the opportunity to, and look at what a mess it is.

Example 3: www.wikipedia.org . They opened the site open to anyone who wanted to edit it, and it got so bad that rel="nofollow" had to be put on all outbound links to counter the benefits SEOs were trying to squeeze out of it. Commercial bias exists in a large percentage of entries and there's nothing anyone can do to stop it...unless they close it up.

Example 4 (a work in progress, but fast heading in the same direction): social media sites. Everyone can work on them and add to them in an "open, and collaborative manner". Now nearly every web design or SEO discussion forum is littered with posts looking for "Stumble Exchange", "Digg exchange, Top 100 Social Bookmarking Sites Submission for $9, With Report", etc. and so on.

Example 5: Google PageRank. Google revealed how PageRank is calculated, and now we have things like www.textlinkads.com and http://contextual.v7n.com/why.php , which are built specifically with "SEO" in mind (i.e. to manipulate the Google PageRank algorithm).

Example 6: Alexa Toolbar Ranking. Alexa published a number in a toolbar, revealed and now marketers game it and use it to promote their own site as "high-traffic".

Scott: You're guilty of indirectly spreading the message about Alexa Toolbar Ranking and other things that it "may" (and aren't) tied into.

Example 7: WordPress Sponsored Templates. WordPress opens up a blogging platform, and dirtbag SEO wannabes have been creating "sponsored templates" ever since. Here's a hell of an article on the subject.

Do you think Matt Mullenweg and the rest of the WordPress team will want to keep working on a product if they know others are going to profit off of it that don't deserve to? I know I wouldn't, and I wouldn't count on them to either. I'm not saying they'll shut WordPress development down tomorrow, but I don't think it would be fair to expect further development to take place forever either.

Dave, you're not a programmer so I don't expect you to fully understand this (although as a host, you may partly understand this). Scott, I'm not sure what you are (although I sense that you're not a programmer either), so I don't know if you'll understand this. But good programmers, the really good programmers, will understand exactly what this means:

Think like an idiot, because they're the ones who will screw up anything you're developing or trying to do.

In every example I've listed above, idiots got a hold of an open concept or code or a piece of information, twisted it, turned it, distorted it, etc.

Any good programmer will have at least one story of something that an idiot tried to do to one of their scripts or programs that was so stupid that they just wanted to reach through their computer and smack the person at the other end (added trash data, etc.)

Any good programmer will have at least one story of a hack attempt (successful or otherwise). SQL Injection may be the most obvious one here (it's the one that comes to mind), but there are a lot of others.

And any good programmer will be able to see the flaw in Open Source logic based on these two things alone (and the historical pattern outlined above, if they know it...and I probably have missed some egregious examples.)

If you open things up, idiots will try to exploit them for their own good or just because they're idiots. And as a programmer, I don't want to have to edit someone else's code to stop something I see clearly. The more you open things like this up, the more you subject yourself and the clients you work on to these risks.

Hello All -

Thanks for your thoughts and discussion. Here's a recap of the poll and some answers to questions that have been raised:

The Poll (so far):
Hosting (the concept) is Dead.................2 8.00%
CMS (Content Management Systems) are
replacing "old school" websites...............9 36.00%
XHTML is replacing HTML......................15 60.00%
Dude... I don't agree with any of these.....7 28.00%

Only two, so far, agree that marketing concept known as "Hosting" is dead. Of course, as I've said, the hardware isn't going away anytime soon, but I suspect that people will do better marketing what you can DO to work with your website, rather than simply running through a list of server specs. And...

That's one reason why I included the part about CMS solutions replacing old school websites. 36% agree. And you will note that several CMS are built on and structured using...

XHTML... which is replacing, or the successor to HTML. Or you can call it an upgrade, but it really does force you to do some things differently (closing tags, for example), than you could with HTML. The "X" in XHTML, is the same "X" in AJAX, which is one important reason why I believe it is the future of the web.

Finally, we have 28% that just say, it ain't so, as have we had a number of comments taking me to task on these points. Well good. I know I have learned a lot in the discussion, and I hope others have too -- different points of view are what it's all about -- just take a look at how the W3C.org proceeds.

Does this then mean that Open Source is being ruined by idiots? I don't think so. Each version of HTML, CSS, and PHP, and Linux, and Apache, and MySQL seem to be coming out and performing just fine.

Sure there are problems. But there are also enough successful releases to fuel the work of a majority of web installations online.

Are there people that don't find WordPress easy to use? How could you argue that. But are there thousands of successful blogs created using it, with more coming online each day?

Both Diane and Adam gave a list of valid technical points that might give someone pause (the MySQL point of Adam's -- that things get sticky for a non-technical type when they face database questions). Heck, I run into some brick walls too. What do you do? That leads me to....

A full circle return to the need for Technical support... at... a good "Hosting" company. But you know, the same company could present itself as a "CMS Website Solutions" company, and probably do quite well.

Of course you still need people behind the scenes running things in the NOC (Network Operations Center), affording the end user the time and convenience of working on their WordPress, Drupal, JOOMLA, etc., website.

- Scott

First off I think Frost hit it right on the head. Everyone on the block now has their own blog because its as simple as going onto myspace and typing in your email. In no way though does that add value to the internet because most blogs are as useless as the opinions being stated on them.

That said CMS isnt bad, its useful for alot of people, including myself in the past, but like LadyNRed said, there are a ton of people who know so little about computers that they couldnt make a half decent website using a CMS, or dont even know that such a program exists. Also, why would a business man waste his time? For example, Im a moron when it comes to anything to do with a car, I dont change tires/brakes or even oil, I pay someone who knows what they are doing. Why? Because its pretty cheap, I get it done right, and I dont want to waste my time doing something Im not interested in.

Plus like Adam has been saying there will always be custom things that are just beyong the scope of a CMS. And also like Adam said, I feel more comftorable knowing when it comes to security that its a closed script. Because then some 14 year old kid didnt add something or screw something up, and that company is liable for anything that they do (or more so).

So sure CMS is important, its helping to open up the internet to a whole mass of people, but those people are primarily the internet iliterate who dont add a whole lot of value to the internet anyways.

Originally Posted by Truly

...why would a business man waste his time?

... So sure CMS is important, its helping to open up the internet to a whole mass of people, but those people are primarily the internet iliterate who dont add a whole lot of value to the internet anyways.

Hello Truly -

A business man would either find someone to do it for him (write a business blog), which is like your example of going to a mechanic for your car, or do it him/herself if he values content/social media marketing. Examples? Amazon.com. Ford Motors. Fox News. There is a long list, because done correctly, business blogging allows you to connect with customers and potential customers. You might like to have a look at ContentMarketingToday.com.

Your final statement cannot be proved. People using CMS/Blogs, are"primarily the internet illiterate? Huh? Again... you fail to look at all the examples of successful business blogging and social media marketing. Hmmmm... maybe you should write to all the PR agencies, and advertising companies, and marketing departments of businesses and tell them not to be spending so much time and energy with CMS/Blogging.

One final example where CMS/Blogging is working great for large organizations: Higher Education.

- Scott

Scott my point is just that before the fact that the internet was reserved primarily for those who were well versed in the internet and required some ammount of work to make a half decent site meant that it kept out alot of teenagers making "I hate Bush" websites and alien autopsy conspiracy websites. Im all for opening up the internet, Im just saying that I know alot of people (as someone in university) that put up ridiculous things on the internet because they can.

Not saying that big companies cant use CMS/blogging, this site is just using a forum that is used by tons of people and is a one size fits all solution.

Finally dont use anything by Fox News as proof of value. Its kind of counter productive.

Well, this is a fairly lengthy thread to go through! I've read through most of the posts and would like to chime in myself:

1) Any claim regarding the number of registered users of a hosted solution indicating a trend towards that entity is fallacious. As proof let me offer this: I know a number of black hatters who write all kinds of scripts to automate account creation and content posting. Hundreds/Thousands of accounts per individual. That being true, then any analysis of numbers related to these sites cannot be used as they are artificially inflated.

2) Whether a codebase is open source or closed has nothing to do with it's security. It's the nature of the code itself which defines whether it is secure or not. And, let us not forget that a good social engineer can bypass 10^(10^100) (that's a googleplex) encryption.

3) There are an unbelievable amount of people who use Frontpage and Dreamweaver when they want to create a static site. It's fairly scary, actually.

4) Any pre-coded solution cannot work for all business models - closed or open source. This is a simple fact. Business models are constantly changing and so must the sites which implement code designed to support a particular business model. What many people do -- whether using an open source solution or a custom solution by an average (or worse) programmer -- is modify their business models to suit what happens to be available as they're very often led, directly or indirectly, into believing that implementation of their model is not possible.

5) CMS is only a portion of the web -- that's simply content management. Nowadays many site visitors and site owners want the site to do more than display information (for example, take ADAM's flower calculator). By definition that's not "content management". I'm finding a much greater trend toward web applications and dynamic features. Such applications and dynamism, to truly suit what the site owner wants must, almost always, be accomplished via custom programming.

6) Every open source platform can be customized to do whatever you want. It may not be upgradeable to the latest version, however, after you make your adjustments.

7) I find the hosting question odd, irrelevant, and implicitly incorrect as have so many others, so I won't offer further comment in this post on that issue.

8) Any code project can die for a variety of reasons. It has nothing to do with whether it's open or closed source, but how it's managed and whether the managers stay interested in the project.

9) There are way too many 3rd class programmers out there who modify custom and open source code in ways that make one want to banish those fools from their keyboards. Any codebase can be bastardized given such programmers.

10) Most website owners are NOT programmers. Some of them are wannabe programmers, but most aren't worthy and they shouldn't even try. Why? Because that's not their field. I wouldn't try a half-bootied attempt to enter into a field of knowledge with just a few weeks of study and some tutorials and expect that what I'd be able to do in that field would be good, respectable, or safe. Because so many think that it's "just" HTML or PHP and that their online tutorial suggests that it's within their ability, we have some truly horrible sites. As an example, I do work for a graphics artist who gives coding their best shot and usually screws everything up and then has to have me come in and fix things, but only after they've figured out that it's not working. Know what they're in for? Being hacked! A slow server! Why? Because some of their problems don't show up as compile-time errors. Instead, they're hidden in the background through poorly written code that just begs for a SQL injection and a database design which makes me want to take tools like PHPMyAdmin out of CPanel (ever heard of trying for 3rd Normal Form?) Oh, and for those reading this wondering why I'd let a client hurt themselves like this, yes, I have told them the consequences of their actions, but one cannot force another to listen to one's advice.

There will always be those who want the so-appearing easy way to a gold mine. Those people will harm the environment they're working in and ultimately suffer through life never quite as successful or happy as they could otherwise be by either 1) putting in the effort to learn something correctly or 2) hiring the right person to do the work. One of my life mottos is that "knowing and accepting one's weaknesses is one of the strongest strengths one may have."

Hi Jeremy -

Thanks for your informative and thorough post. You would probably like the Clint Eastwood line, "A good man always knows his limitations."

I know... people found the "hosting is dead" premise a little wacko, but I still believe that it is long over due for a "repackaging" in the marketing sense.

Your #5 -- the web providing applications is probably an excellent tangent that relates directly to such possible "repackaging." I'm not sure if you had "SaaS" (Software as a Service) in mind, but there are a lot of providers into that game, and so the repackaging has already begun. SaaS requires "hosting", but doesn't "sell" the list of hosting specifications like the old schoolers do.

Thanks for your ideas.

- Scott