Which of the above are marketing issues? Sorry, they are technical issues mate.
We don't use Apache either, but then again Apache's only drawback is that one, PHP has many more than that one drawback.
"Nor apache does, but it has 60% of the market share."
Yeah? Ask Michael Radwin and Sterling Hughes about that. The quality of support is generally poor, the timing of support is generally sketchy. For enterprises they need better than that. For developers it's fine though.
"The OS community has proven to give one of the best supports ever."
Great. But it's also one of it's biggest weaknesses. When I need to install 15-30 different modules to make an application work, there is a serious issue with long-term viability and whether those modules will still be available.
"Decentralization is one of the main OS strengths"
I'd recommend you open the archives of the PHP forum, and see which modules were being recommended to do various tasks. Few of those are still available, and those threads are only 3-4 years old.
If you read carefully, I say ASP wasn't really enterprise ready either.
"Getting down to the level you propose, I don't see what makes it different from ASP or other languaje in facts of features."
There are big differences between PHP and J2EE/.NET in this area though [img]images/smilies/smile.gif[/img]
Yeah, ASP relies on IIS. I've already said it wasn't ready though. JSP relies on an applicatoin server, which is much different from a webserver. I never said Perl was enterprise-ready, did I? I'm not saying it's not, but for us it wouldn't have been suitable for that reason (as well as others).
"ASP relies on IIS, JSP on an application server, Perl on the webserver of your choice, how does this make the difference? "
I feel like you didn't read my post at all. I listed the reasons OUR company didn't choose PHP. I said for OTHER companies the list would likely be different and for those, PHP may be a fit, but I felt that by and large the requirements would probably disqualify PHP or, at best, mean organizations compromised on their requirements in order to choose PHP (like Yahoo did).
"A nice IDE is an enterprise must? "
Your corporation didn't switch because of problems with EVERY proprietary solution, they switched because of problems with specific solutions. Not paying for licenses, and then having to pay for consultants isn't, after all, that much different. The cost of 1 consultant for 1 day being generally more any Windows license.
"I'm working for a nationwide corporation coding PHP. They are in the switch from some propietary tools to OS ones beacouse they got tired of paying for nothing but problems."
Yeah, because I was looking for a hologram [img]images/smilies/rolleyes.gif[/img]
"But again, FYI, php does have some nice IDEs, and some are free, but again, they arenīt included in a "nice package" all together with PHP and Apache in a CD with a hologram "But, of course, if your idea of "enterprise ready" is to have someone to blame when things go wrong, PHP will never be ready
Again, you are recommending other modules, other tools, which require further maintenance. To US that wasn't acceptable and was one of our oprational requirements. If you want to mock our operational requirements, feel free, but I'd think it would be responsible to actually stick to operational requirements.
I love having words put in my mouth. I also love being listened to. Maybe I'll experience that soon.
"But, of course, if your idea of "enterprise ready" is to have someone to blame when things go wrong, PHP will never be ready "