Didn't you just contradict yourself? How can it be simpler and all be simple? Simpler implies one is greater in simplicity so which is it?
FWIW, we were running Apache 1.3 with patches on OpenBSD. For us, using the 2.x branch wasn't possible without staying atop the modules for code issues/vulnerabilities. Considering other client expectations, we didn't have the resources to audit everything like that. The fact that OpenBSD 5.2 included Nginx by default was a nice plus for us too, but we started the move before then.
"which is it?"
He just said which one it was. I don't see how anyone could fail to understand this.
No, I did not.
> How can it be simpler and all be simple? Simpler implies one is greater in simplicity so which is it?
Is English not your first language? I can choose 5 simple things, and then compare them to each other and say one is simpler. They're all still simple.
> FWIW, we were running Apache 1.3 with patches on OpenBSD. For us, using the 2.x branch wasn't possible without staying atop the modules for code issues/vulnerabilities.
Sounds like your OS was the real culprit for not keeping up with newer releases. Again, if Nginx works for you, great, you can promote that without putting down Apache which is quite simple and rock solid stable as well.
As someone who's apparently more fluent than I am in English, you should have noted that I'm not "putting down" Apache as much as showing that, out of the box, Nginx still is a better option than Apache. This isn't my opinion as much as it is empirically observed fact both in our environment as well as our clients' environments.
I didn't insult you, it was an honest question as I can't assume everyone here is a native English speaker and your confusion could have easily been a language thing.
> And English is my first language, thank you.
OK, great, then I don't know what was at all confusing about what I said.
> Apache as much as showing that, out of the box, Nginx still is a better option than Apache.
Such blanket statements are simply unsupportable. It depends entirely on the workload, needs, language, and configuration. Out of the box, Apache isn't configured for the process model that everyone complains makes it a pig.
This is the stupid HN system at work: Someone who doesn't understand English being a native speaker (simple vs simpler) can downvote you because he has "earned" that right, by submitting a gazillion articles with 1 point each.
While you're here, you may want to take a browse on the guidelines http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Newer releases are quite bad from both a security and a stability standpoint. They did not make configuration simpler, so the idea that using the last reasonable release of apache was the problem doesn't make any sense.
There was no need to be rude.
Two feet is not very far to walk. Three feet is farther, but it is still not a great distance to walk. Two things can both be short/simple even if one is a bit shorter/simpler.