Re: strawberry vs activestate perl

Strawberry Perl also includes a preconfigured C compiler and make tool, so you can build XS components directly. Both distributions come with various precompiled modules, and you can even install PPMs into Strawberry Perl or compile PPMs with Strawberry Perl for ActiveState Perl. If you need commercial support, ActiveState Perl is better, because there is an office that will send you an invoice.

Comment on Re: strawberry vs activestate perl Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: strawberry vs activestate perl by dHarry (Abbot) on May 25, 2009 at 08:14 UTC
If you need commercial support, ActiveState Perl is better You wish;-) Fair enough, I worked a few years with ActiveState Perl on Windows and it has served me well. Meaning as long as there is a ppm that installs correctly... In my experience ActiveState is not too responsive in case of problems, e.g. if you issue a bug report you're likely to hear nothing ever after.	[reply]
Re^3: strawberry vs activestate perl by Corion (Patriarch) on May 25, 2009 at 08:19 UTC
Ah - but commercial support is important for a different reason (you're aware of this, but others might not be). In certain places, you are not allowed to introduced "unsupported" software. And support necessarily means getting an invoice, and budgeting for that invoice. That's the advantage ActiveState has over Strawberry. How responsive AS are with their support I don't know, but I'm not the one paying our AS contract or opening tickets with them `:)`.	[reply]