You are reading the article Web Developer Vs Web Tester updated in December 2023 on the website Bellydancehcm.com. We hope that the information we have shared is helpful to you. If you find the content interesting and meaningful, please share it with your friends and continue to follow and support us for the latest updates. Suggested January 2024 Web Developer Vs Web TesterDifference Between Web Developer vs Web Tester
Web development, programming languages, Software testing & othersWhat is Web Development?
Everything you see on the internet is put up on numerous websites. But how are these websites created? Who is responsible for all the content displayed on these websites? Who designs all those webpage layouts? Where do the features and designs on the websites come from? Who programs these websites to deliver the users the exact information they might be looking for?
Professional Web Developers and Web Designers do all the above-listed jobs. But before we go on to what web developers do, it is essential to know what web development is. Web development is a broad term that includes working out all the technical features of a website. It has everything from creating a website to maintaining it. Web development generates websites that are fully functional and user-friendly. Web development is not a one-time process. After creating a website, it becomes essential to keep it updated. Web development requires professional skills and abilities, technical skills, and appropriate degrees.Head-to-Head Comparison Between Web Developer vs Web Tester (Infographics)
Following are the top differences between web developer vs web tester:Web Developer
It is the job of a web developer to create a website, and creating a website means designing the website’s layout and putting up the content on the website as per the directions of the clients and as per the requirements of the users. Web developers don’t just build websites. There is a lot more than web developers do, and their job ranges from generating the layout and features of a website to understanding the graphic design and all the programming features of a website. They are also responsible for writing and editing the content of the websites and the complex process of building WordPress themes for websites.
To be a web developer, you also need to master specific professional skills, and also you need to know several programming languages. And then, there are the coding skills you need to remember to be a web developer. As a web developer, you meet the client, discuss their needs, and then accordingly, you build up the website which caters to the needs of the client and the needs of the users. A website must be user-friendly; that is what most helps generate website traffic. The web developers work out all the technical requirements for making a website and keeping it updated. It is like growing a flower. For a flower to blossom, you need to keep nurturing it by watering it and taking due care of it till it blossoms into a mature flower. Similarly, a web developer first creates a website and then takes care of it by occasionally prioritizing the tasks and updating the site.Technical requirements for a web developer:
It might look like being a web developer is an easy job, but it takes many things together to be a perfect web designer. It would help to have at least a bachelor’s degree and the required technical skills and knowledge of computer programming. You can also take up some online courses to learn about web development. You must have basic web development skills. The fundamentals of design imaging, multimedia programming, animation skills, basic web designs, content writing and editing, knowledge of databases, etc., go into the making of professional web developers.What Salary can you Expect as a Web Developer? How to be a Good Web Developer?
Doing a job and then doing it well always pays off. You don’t just want to enter a field of work; you want to excel in every possible manner. It would help to remember the following things to be a good web developer.1. Good Communication Skills 2. Passion 3. Be the Perfectionist
People don’t want their work done by someone who can’t cross-check it. You should be a perfectionist if you want to be a web developer and a successful web developer, for that matter. After all, you don’t want to commit a mistake that might break the website you have worked so hard on.Web Testing
When you are done building a website, you often go online. But before you go online and be available for the users, you must test the website to find any problems or issues. If you find any, you try to correct the issue before you go live and publicly reveal the website. Web testing is a kind of software testing that is conducted on the newly formed website to check for any issues and problems with their proper functioning, programming, security issues, the issues related to the availability of the website across users of various devices like mobile phones, laptops, etc. and also to see if your website is designed to play host to potential traffic which may be called as load testing. The web testers do all this testing.
Recommended CoursesWhat do Web Testers Do?
Testing a website for any potential errors or issues is very important. As a web tester, you must check the website for any possible functionality disorders and issues and then set them right. After a website is designed, the users expect fairly reliable and functional websites that work fairly well across all devices. As a web tester, you must perform important tests on the newly built websites before launching them.Web Tester Tools and Techniques
Here we are going to understand how both the tools and techniques differ.
1. Functionality Testing: Your clients want their websites to function flawlessly and accurately. The functionality tests include checking all the links in the webpages, the database connections, the cookies and the forms, media components, search, libraries, and scripts and validating HTML and CSS.
3. Interface Testing: Two main interfaces are:
The web server and application server interface
Application server and database server interface
See if the interactions between these interfaces are functioning correctly. Also, you need to check for errors and connections.
4. Compatibility Testing: It includes Browser compatibility, Operating system compatibility, Mobile browsing, and Printing options. You have to check for all these compatibilities. You can try operating the website across browsers, operating systems, and mobiles to check for compatibility issues.
5. Performance Testing: This test is conducted precisely to test the web load. It includes web load testing and web stress testing. You need to see if the webpage is sustaining to heavy load. You can try testing the webpage across networks with varying speeds and connectivity.
6. Security Testing: Generally, web applications save information about the users, their files, details, billing, and payment information. It would be best if you made sure that the users can trust the website and put in proper security checks to maintain the users’ trust. It is essential to keep the data of the users safe and secure.
It would help if you ensured the data was kept secure and private. You should limit the access before granting access to sensitive data. You need to check for any possible security issues and correct them.Web Developers and Web Testers
Now you must have gained a fair deal of information regarding what web developers do and what web testers do. The work of the two is correlated. While it is the web developer’s job to create and maintain the websites, the web testers check for and address various issues and problems that this website might have. The two fields are interrelated. Neither can work without the other. A web developer may develop a website but cannot launch it until a professional web tester has put it through various tests of varying levels. To create a well-designed, perfectly functional, and reliable website, it is essential to involve both the web developer and the web tester.Recommended Articles
This has been a guide to Web Developer vs Web Tester. Here we have discussed Web Developer vs Web Tester head-to-head comparison, key differences, infographics, and a comparison table. You may also have a look at the following articles to learn more –
You're reading Web Developer Vs Web Tester
Nowadays, site builders are basically a magic toolbox to everyone who is not a web designer. Building a website, which was once out of reach, can now be done with little effort – but there are things that website builders cannot do that web designers can. The question is, should you hire a web designer to make your site or simply use a website builder and build it yourself?
Site builders like Wix, IMCreator, Weebly, and Jigsy have helped millions of people create sites with ease, without having experience using Photoshop or programming knowledge. For people with small site needs, these tools are very helpful. There are many site builders, most of which emerged in the last years, where people can build a site simply by dragging and dropping things, publishing their websites within a day. Similarly, there are literally millions of talented web designers out there, and their numbers are growing every day.
This can be confusing, especially if you are looking to build your first site, but both builders of websites and web designers have their pros and cons that you should analyze carefully before making a decision.Site Builders
For those who do not speak the same language as web designers, site builders are a gift from heaven. There are many builders of web sites with hundreds of templates for you to use and everything is very simple. No programming, no FTP connection, no registration of domain names and name servers, and all these technical things. Once satisfied, users can simply publish their websites and voila, are already up and running.
Although these site builders appear to be perfect, they can easily lead to a lot of confusion and problems. Things like transferring to a different hosting, their limited resources, and design redundancy are just some of the common problems in the long run may occur.Web Designers
If you hire a web designer who can provide all the right features, you will have your own hosting account and will not have to worry about transferring your website from one server to another. And you will not be limited by the resources and flexibility.
The needs of your site will certainly increase to grow your business and audience. And this is exactly the problem with all site builders: they will not be able to accommodate your needs with increasing traffic to your site. With a good web designer, you can ask for features that hardly find in website builders. Features like a rotating banner, a poll, dynamic navigation, a robust image gallery, and other things you might need.
So, if your needs are simple, and likely to be so for many years, spending a few hours building your own website through a site builder is practical. This is because, usually, catalog sites do not need a lot of fancy features. Only a gallery, a place to include text and other simple things. The same is also true for restaurant sites.
But if you need other things, like an online shop, a news site, membership sites, forums and heavy sites with similar features, it is highly recommended to seek professional services. This way you will save time, money and energy, and will end up with a site matching your needs.
Does the Web need another search engine?
Jaideep Singh and Jay Bhatti, the co-founders of Spock, are betting that it does — specifically, one for people search.
With a rumored $7 million in venture capital from Clearstone Venture Partners and Opus Capital Ventures, Spock came out of stealth mode in April at the Web 2.0 Expo in San Francisco, and is currently conducting an invitation-only beta with over 25 thousand users. Talking about how Spock will work and might be used, Bhatti says flatly, “Our goal is to index everyone everywhere.”
Spock originated with the founders’ frustration in managing their connections. With over a thousand people in his address book, Bhatti says, “Every time I started looking for someone, it was impossible to find them if I didn’t know their name exactly. And if I wanted to know, say, everyone who had got their MBA at Stanford and currently lives in Seattle, I could never do that with my Outlook address book or any other application that was out there.” The challenge, he explains, is to create an application that can keep track of all the information in people’s address books while making that information easily accessible.
Spock, he says, “almost is like a chúng tôi for people,” in that it will allow users access to connections from any web-connected computer. The difference, Bhatti says “is the scale of what we’re trying to do. It’s not a web site. It’s a search engine.”
Bhatti adds that, contrary to appearances, the name is not an allusion to the famous Star Trek character. Rather, he says the name was chosen because it was easy to remember, say, and spell. Another consideration is the company’s hope that “to spock” will soon became a verb like “to google.”
How Spock Beams You Up
Currently, the results given by the beta are reasonable, but have noticeable gaps in almost any topic you can think of. However, Bhatti insists that the service will improve as it continues. He says that Spock already includes at least 100 million names, and is growing steadily. “We’re going to be adding two million unique people every day because we’re crawling the web,” he says. In addition, as people register for Spock, they can speed the process by uploading their address books from their mail readers or their connections on social networking sites. As people add and vote on tags, the site will be enriched even further.
Besides curiosity and managing personal contacts, Bhatti sees many different uses for Spock. The site could be used as a portal for breaking news stories, quickly providing information from both official media and blog sources. Headhunters could use it to find job applicants. Individuals might use it for dating, or for travel or consumer information. Researchers could use Spock to find all related information about a search subject. Since Spock will index dead people as readily as live ones, it could also be used for genealogy research if it grows as planned.
“Spock is going to become the central point for searching for people,” Bhatti says simply. “Everyone will go to us and nowhere else.”
The 72 PPI Web Resolution Myth
Written by Steve Patterson.
If you’ve been around computers and digital images for a while, especially if you’re a web designer or a photographer publishing your photos online, you’ve no doubt heard it said that the correct resolution for images displayed on the web, or on computer screens in general, is 72 pixels per inch (ppi).
You may have even heard it said that while 72 ppi is correct for images displayed on a Mac, a Windows-based PC needs the resolution set to 96 ppi.
Some say it’s “ppi” (pixels per inch), others claim it’s “dpi” (dots per inch), and the whole thing would get very confusing if it were not for one small fact – it’s all complete nonsense! In this tutorial, we’ll learn why there’s simply no such thing as a standard web or screen resolution and why, if your images are destined for the web, you don’t need to worry about image resolution at all!A Little History…
The origin of the 72 ppi screen resolution dates all the way back to the mid 1980’s when Apple released its first Macintosh computers. These computers included a built-in 9 inch display with a screen resolution of 72 pixels per inch. Why 72 pixels per inch? It’s because the Macintosh screens were specifically designed to work in perfect harmony with Apple’s ImageWriter printers, which had a print resolution of 144 dots per inch – exactly twice the resolution of the screen. This made it easy to scale the screen display to the printed page, which meant that your text and graphics could be previewed on the screen at the exact size they would appear when printed. Later on, as Apple began making larger displays for the Macintosh, they made sure to keep the screen resolutions set to the same 72 pixels per inch so users would always see an accurate on-screen preview of the printed document (as long as they were using an ImageWriter printer).
But the 72 pixels per inch screen resolution was a standard only with Apple, and it didn’t last. Third party companies selling monitors for the Macintosh didn’t stick to the standard, and neither did competing PC monitors. Today, nearly three decades later, technology has greatly improved and the days of screens with a resolution of only 72 ppi are long gone. Even Apple, the company that started the whole thing, now sells their displays with much higher resolutions. No one is making 72 ppi screens anymore. No one is using 72 ppi screens anymore. And yet, even though that old technology is far behind us, we still have a whole lot of people continuing to believe that we need to set the resolution of our images to 72 pixels per inch in Photoshop before uploading them to the web. Most people think the reason is so that the images will display properly on screen, so let’s start things off by learning an easy way to prove that your computer monitor, along with every modern computer monitor, actually has a resolution much higher than 72 ppi.Putting The 72 PPI Standard To The Test
Like everyone else these days, your computer’s display (whether it’s a standalone monitor, an all-in-one system like an iMac, or part of a laptop) has a screen resolution higher than 72 pixels per inch, and you don’t have to take my word for it. You can easily test it yourself. All you need is a ruler or tape measure. Now, when a store sells you a computer monitor, they usually tell you its size based on its diagonal width, with some common sizes being 17 inches, 19 inches, 24 inches, and so on. That’s fine, but for our test here, we don’t need to care about that number. What we need to find out is the actual width, in inches, of your screen. To do that, simply grab your ruler or tape measure and measure your screen area from left to right. Make sure you’re measuring only the screen area itself. Don’t include any of the border around the screen. We need the screen’s actual width (computer monitor photo from Shutterstock):
Measure the width of your screen (not including the outer border).
Once you’ve measured the width, the other thing you need to make sure of is that your monitor is set to its native display resolution, which is the actual number of pixels your screen can display from left to right and from top to bottom. For example, a monitor with a native display resolution of 1920 x 1080 (commonly referred to these days as “full HD”) contains 1920 pixels from left to right and 1080 pixels from top to bottom. I’m currently using a monitor with a native display resolution of 2560 x 1440, but my laptop has a native display resolution of 1920 x 1200 so it does vary, which means you’ll need to know the native display resolution of your specific monitor and make sure it’s what you have the monitor set to in your operating system’s display options.
Now that you’ve measured your screen’s actual width and you’ve made sure your monitor is running at its native display resolution, to find out what its actual screen resolution is (in pixels per inch), simply take the first number from the native display resolution, which tells you the width of your screen in pixels, and divide it by the width of your screen in inches. For example, my native display resolution is 2560 x 1440, so I’ll take that first number, 2560, which is the width of the screen in pixels, and I’ll divide it by the width in inches, which in my case was 23.4 (or pretty close, anyway). Using my operating system’s handy built-in calculator, 2560 ÷ 23.4 = 109.4, which I’ll round off to 109. So, just from this quick and simple test, I’ve confirmed that my screen resolution is 109 pixels per inch, not 72 pixels per inch. Your own test with your screen may give you a different result from mine, but unless you’re still using one of those original Macintosh computers from the mid ’80s, it will be a lot higher than 72 ppi.
If you like, you can do the same thing with the height of your screen. Just take your ruler or tape measure and measure the screen’s actual height in inches (once again avoiding the border area around it):
Measure the height of your screen (not including the outer border).
Then, take the second number from your screen’s native display resolution, which gives you the height in pixels, and divide it by the height in inches. Again, my native display resolution is 2560 x 1440 so I’ll take that second number, 1440, and divide it by my measured screen height which was 13.2 inches. Using my calculator, 1440 ÷ 13.2 = 109.09 which again I’ll round off to 109. As we can see, you should get pretty much the same result using either the width or height of your screen. In my case, they both worked out to 109 pixels per inch, not 72 pixels per inch.
For comparison, let’s check the actual screen resolution of my laptop. It’s a MacBook Pro (made of course by Apple, the company that gave us the original 72 ppi standard many years ago). My MacBook Pro has a native display resolution of 1920 x 1200, so just as I did before, I’ll take that first number, 1920, which gives me the screen width in pixels, and I’ll divide it by the width of the screen in inches, which in this case is 14.4. So, 1920 ÷ 14.4 = 133.3, which I’ll round off to 133 pixels per inch. That’s a lot higher than 72 and even higher than my standalone monitor. I’ll do the same thing with the height, taking the height in pixels (1200) and dividing it by the height in inches (9). 1200 ÷ 9 = 133.3, again rounded off to 133 pixels per inch.
Two different displays, each with two different screen resolutions (109 ppi and 133 ppi), both considerably higher than 72 ppi which, according to many people today, remains the industry standard resolution for viewing images on the web and on screen. If my screen, your screen and everyone else’s screen has a resolution higher than 72 ppi, not to mention the fact that both of my screens had very different resolutions from each other and your screen may have a different resolution as well, then clearly, not only is there no official standard anymore for screen resolution, but even if there was, it would no longer be 72 ppi. Those days, like the original Macintosh computers it was designed for, are history.Image Resolution Affects Print Size, Not Screen Size
If the fact that computer monitors today all have screen resolutions higher than 72 ppi hasn’t convinced you that there’s no such thing anymore as a 72 ppi screen resolution standard, here’s another important fact to consider. If you previously read through our Image Resolution, Pixel Dimensions and Document Size tutorial, you already know that image resolution has absolutely nothing to do with how your image appears on your screen. In fact, a digital image, on its own, has no inherent resolution at all. It’s just pixels. It has a certain number of pixels from left to right and a certain number from top to bottom. The width and height of an image, in pixels, is known as its pixel dimensions, and that’s all a computer screen cares about.
The size at which an image appears on your screen depends only on two things – the pixel dimensions of the image and the display resolution of your screen. As long as you’ve set your screen to its native display resolution as we discussed earlier, then an image will be displayed pixel-for-pixel. In other words, each pixel in the image will take up exactly one pixel on your screen. For example, a 640×480 pixel image would fill a 640×480 pixel area of your screen. An 800 pixel-wide banner on a website would appear 800 pixels wide on the screen. No more, no less. And no matter what you set the image’s resolution to in Photoshop, whether it’s 72 ppi, 300 ppi or 3000 ppi, it will have no effect at all on how large or small the image appears on the screen.
That’s because image resolution affects only one thing – the size of the image when it’s printed. By setting the resolution in Photoshop, we tell the printer, not the screen, how many of the pixels in the image to squeeze into an inch of paper. The more pixels you’re squeezing into every inch of paper, the smaller the image will appear when printed. And generally speaking, the more pixels you’re printing per inch, the higher the print quality.
We can easily figure out how large a photo will print based on a certain image resolution. Simply take the width of the photo in pixels and divide it by your image resolution, then take the height of the photo in pixels and divide it by the image resolution as well. If we take a 640 x 480 pixel image, as an example, and set its resolution to 72 ppi in Photoshop, then we can divide the width and height of the photo by its resolution to determine that it will print on paper at roughly 8.9 x 6.7 inches. If we increase its resolution in Photoshop to, say, 240 ppi, which is a more common print resolution, then again if we do the math, dividing the pixel width and height by 240 ppi, we know that the photo would print at a size of 2.7 x 2 inches, which is much smaller than if we had printed it at 72 ppi but the overall print quality would be much better. But what’s more important to understand here is that by changing the resolution, we are not, in any way, affecting the appearance of the image on screen.
To see more clearly how resolution affects print size and not screen size, here’s an image I have open in Photoshop. This little guy has also been trying to make sense of all this 72 ppi web resolution stuff, but it looks like he may be overthinking it a bit (thinking child photo from Shutterstock):
Image resolution is really not this complicated, but definitely an A for effort.
I’ll open Photoshop’s Image Size dialog box by going up to the Image menu in the Menu Bar along the top of the screen and choosing Image Size:
At the top of the Image Size dialog box is the Pixel Dimensions section which tells us the width and height of the image in pixels. Here we can see that my photo has both a width and height of 500 pixels, making it a decent size for display on the web. This is the only part of the Image Size dialog box that your computer screen cares about – the actual pixel dimensions of the image:
The Pixel Dimensions section shows us the width and height in pixels.
Below the pixel dimensions is the Document Size section which tells us how large the image would currently appear on paper if we were to print it. This section deals exclusively with print size and has no effect at all on how the image appears on screen. It also happens to be home to the all-important Resolution option (the reason we’re all here!), which makes sense because resolution affects print size, not screen size. As we can see, Photoshop has gone ahead and set the resolution of my photo to 72 pixels per inch (yes, even Photoshop is contributing to the 72 ppi myth), and directly above the Resolution option, in the Width and Height boxes, we can see that at 72 ppi, my 500 x 500 pixel photo would print at 6.944 x 6.944 inches on paper (500 ÷ 72 = 6.944):
The Document Size section shows us the print size based on the current resolution. It has no effect on screen size.
Let’s see what happens if I increase the image resolution. Before I do that, though, I’m going to quickly uncheck the Resample Image option near the bottom of the dialog box so that the image keeps its original pixel dimensions when I change the resolution:
Unchecking the Resample Image option.
With Resample Image unchecked, I’ll increase the resolution from 72 pixels per inch to 240 pixels per inch. We can see in the Pixel Dimensions section at the top that increasing the resolution has not changed the actual pixel dimensions. It’s still 500 x 500 pixels, which means it would still take up a 500 x 500 pixel area on the screen. But at 240 ppi, it would now print on paper at a size of only 2.083 x 2.083 inches (500 ÷ 240 = 2.083). Changing the resolution changed the photo’s print size, but nothing else:
The image would now print smaller but would remain the exact same 500 x 500 pixel size on screen.
I’ll again increase the image resolution, this time to something crazy like 500 pixels per inch, just to make the math really easy. A 500 x 500 pixel image, set to a resolution of 500 pixels per inch, would print as a 1 x 1 inch image on paper (500 ÷ 500 = 1). Once again, the actual pixel dimensions of the image have not changed. Even at 500 ppi, my image would appear no larger or smaller on screen that it would at 72 ppi, or 240 ppi, or at any resolution because it’s still a 500 x 500 pixel image regardless of the resolution setting, and its pixel dimensions are all your computer screen cares about:
At 500 ppi, the image would print very small indeed but would still appear as a 500 x 500 pixel image on screen.
Finally, here’s a side-by-side comparison of the image as it appears at all three of the above resolutions. I’ve made the image smaller (it’s now only 200 x 200 pixels) so I can fit all three versions next to each other, but the first version on the left was saved at 72 ppi. The version in the middle was saved at 240 ppi, and the version on the right was saved at 500 ppi:
A 72 ppi (left), 240 ppi (middle) and 500 ppi (right) version of the image.
As we can clearly see, the resolution has no effect at all on how the image looks on screen. All three versions each take up a space of exactly 200 x 200 pixels regardless of the resolution setting. The quality of each version is also exactly the same. Each version would print at a very different size because of the different resolution settings, but it makes no difference whatsoever to the screen size or to the image quality.
While it’s doubtful that this 72 ppi web and screen resolution nonsense will go away any time soon, I hope this tutorial has at least made it easier to see why it is, in fact, nonsense at this point. Computer monitors these days all have screen resolutions higher than 72 ppi, and the image resolution option in Photoshop affects only a photo’s print size, not its screen size.
Any photo with pixel dimensions small enough to display on the web would be too small for anyone to download and print a good quality version at a useful size, so with all these reasons in mind, if your photo will only be viewed on screen, whether it’s on the web, in an email, or whatever the case may be, there is simply no logical reason why you would need to set its resolution to 72 ppi in Photoshop. Unless you’re printing the photo, you don’t need to worry about image resolution at all. And there we have it!
Google’s Martin Splitt discussed the value of being flexible enough to replacing a plugin or add-on if it cannot be adapted to scoring better in core web vitals.
“If someone is in a situation where they’re using various different tools, add-ons, apps and plugins to make their user experience “better” or upsell the user or whatever it is and those tools aren’t making the changes… and they can’t implement them differently… should they be looking at different solutions?”
Martin Splitt answered:
“I guess looking at different solutions is definitely a good idea.”
Martin next made the analogy of owning a car with very good gas mileage that had a flaw in that it tended to crash every couple of months.Screenshot of Loren Baker, a Founder of Search Engine Journal
“The Tesla analogy?”
Martin Splitt paused a second then responded:
“No…“Screenshot of Martin Splitt Playfully Responding With a No
They both chuckled about the joke and moved on with the discussion.
“If it gives you more stuff that potentially is great but it has these implications… you have to judge for your specific case if you’re okay with the implications that it has or if you’re like nah, I’ll try to see if we have something else that does that without the problems.”
So in other words, if a publisher’s site is slowed down because of a web page feature and the feature cannot be optimized then maybe it’s time to look for another way to accomplish what that feature was doing or simply do without the feature if it’s not really going to be missed.
These web page features can be plugins and apps like chatbots or contact forms that are slowing down rendering.
“It’s a good chance to look through all of these legacy tools that people have utilized over the years and put together a nice SWOT analysis.
What are the pros and cons? Such and such ups conversion rates or whatever by X percent…Core Web Vitals May Require Website Technical Analysis
Part of the battle of optimizing is measuring how much impact any plugin or addon has on a site. Lighthouse and PageSpeed Insight give an idea of what the troubling files are.
But at a certain point, optimizing for speed might make publishers think hard about how necessary some addons are to a site because the slower page speed could be working against conversions and rankings.
And that means tossing out everything that’s acting like a dead weight to the site and slowing it down.Citation
Watch Martin Splitt at 38:15 minute mark
Virtualmin has two versions, VirtualMin GPL which is open source and free to use, as well as Virtualmin Professional with added features and support. All prices are for one server hosting a max number of domains:
10 annual license: $139.00
50 Annual License: $199.00
100 Annual license: $299.00
250 annual license: $399.00
Unlimited Lifetime: $999.00
How would you like to be able to manage multiple Linux virtual servers (or even one server for that matter) from one simple web-based GUI? Look no further than Virtualmin, a web hosting control panel for Linux and Unix systems. You can manage, modify, and control virtual domains, mail servers, databases, file servers, applications and more from one simple to use dashboard. Plus, you have four options for using virtualmin: web, mobile, command line, and remote API.Virtualmin has two versions, VirtualMin GPL which is open source and free to use, as well as Virtualmin Professional with added features and support. All prices are for one server hosting a max number of domains:
The Virtualmin download page list the steps to install Virtualmin on your server.
Note that Virtualmin has a setup script that makes installation easier, but it will only work with certain operating systems (Virtualmin calls them grade A):
CentOS 5 and 6 on i386 or x86_64
RHEL 5 and 6 on i386 and x86_64
Scientific Linux 6 on i386 and x86_64
Debian 6 on i386 or amd64
Ubuntu 8.04 LTS and 10.04 LTS on i386 or amd64
You can use Virtualmin with other server OS’s, but the script will probably not work, which makes installing a bit more of a hassle. There is a way to “fake” the install script to thinking it’s installing on a grade A OS. For example, if you want to install Virtualmin on Ubuntu 11.10, a simple change will make the chúng tôi script think it’s being installed on versions 10.04 LTS. (no guarantees that this will work with every system)
replace “Ubuntu 11.10 n l” with “Ubuntu 10.04.02 LTS”
Save the file (Ctrl + o) and exit (Ctrl + x)
Note: The Ubuntu LTS (long term support ) releases are considered grade A by VirtualMin, but as of this writing Ubuntu’s 12.04 LTS is not listed.Install Virtualmin
Download the script:
u+x chúng tôi the install script:
chúng tôi long as you have a grade A system (or at least fake that you have one), the script will handle the entire install process. When it’s finished, all you need to do is open a browser and go to port 10000 on that server:Screenshots
Try Virtualmin yourself by using the free online demo.
Chuck Romano is a business and technology professional with over 10 years experience in document imaging and 11 years in computer repair. Chuck provides results driven expertise in fields such as Healthcare IT, document imaging/workflow systems, marketing, and management. He is a Linux enthusiast and evangelist.
Subscribe to our newsletter!
Our latest tutorials delivered straight to your inbox
Sign up for all newsletters.
Update the detailed information about Web Developer Vs Web Tester on the Bellydancehcm.com website. We hope the article's content will meet your needs, and we will regularly update the information to provide you with the fastest and most accurate information. Have a great day!