[CALUG] Convert. Web pages in .asp to html

[Bryan J Smith]

On Sun, May 5, 2013 at 7:36 AM, Richard Stuart <rl.stuart at verizon.net>wrote:

> Do any of you have any ideas on how to convert asp to html
>

As Michael originally pointed out, you don't convert to HTML.  HTML pages
are [largely] static content.  Active Server Pages (ASP) are dynamic.
 Dynamic pages use functions and libraries that can be Server-side
(Application Server) and/or Client-side (Browser) specific.

Also, as others pointed out, there are great differences between old,
legacy ASP (VB-centric) and newer ASP.NET (.NET-centric, which is C# aka
Java object-like).  The biggest issue with the former is that the functions
and libraries are older Windows IIS and IE-specific, not even supported in
some cases by newer IIS and IE, server and client.  The latter is at least
Java-based, especially when it comes to system and other methods, although
there are Win32-only specifics too.

In both cases, your "best bet" is to investigate the great number of ASP/
ASP.NET to JavaServer Pages (JSP) converts and solutions.  They won't work
flawlessly, but they will often handle much of the burden for you.  Again,
the biggest issue will functions and libraries, especially old, legacy ASP
that will not even be supported on newer Windows platforms, much less
Linux.  As always, Microsoft solutions are designed for Win32-only, and do
not even support some of their non-desktop/server platform well.

and cgi/perl scripts.
>

Again, CGI is a dynamic, server-side solution.  You don't convert it to
HTML.

Here's an analogy ...
 - Thinking a dynamic server/language page can be converted into a static
HTML page is like thinking one can convert a Macro-laden Office document
into a static, flat text file.

The biggest issue with enterprises is the sheer amount of investment they
make into periodically _abandoned_ Microsoft solutions.

I had one major, household name company that evaluated, but failed (for
political reasons) to go with standard HTML and Java applets in 2001, and
made heavy investments in IIS, IE and ASP.  By 2008, they were going nuts
since both their on-line and internal presence -- 90% of their operations
-- were MS IE 6-only, and wish they had gone with an open set of standards.
 Unfortunately, by then, they had 400 developers who felt threatened with
either training or replacement if they moved to a open standard platform,
so that "inertia" was hard to defeat, even if it saved the company
$100M/year.

The problem is never cost, but inertia.  Total Cost of Ownership (TCO)
almost always favors open standards, beyond initial cost, which is minor in
comparison.

-- bjs

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Active_Server_Pages
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JavaServer_Pages


--
Bryan J Smith - Professional, Technical Annoyance
b.j.smith at ieee.org - http://www.linkedin.com/in/bjsmith
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.unknownlamer.org/pipermail/calug/attachments/20130505/aad47b07/attachment.htm