Also, the article you posted was interesting Harry, especially Sun's response (;)). I thought that the one line was the best:
quoted from thread harry posted
I may be wrong, but I don't know of any credible organizations that have done performance testing of the two platforms. I would be wary of posts that say PHP "can produce a page in about 1/8 the time as a ASP.NET page can". Where does this information come from?
I think a little more research is in order given this explaination:
"PHP interprets all of its code inside of the PHP program itself, and since it is not accessing any other outside sources like COM objects."
ASP.NET does have the backward-compatibility to use COM, but does not use it in normal page processing. That statement may have been true for ASP 3.0, but it is not applicable to ASP.NET.
I'm not going to make any outrageous claims, but lets look at a few facts:
--PHP has been shown to be slightly faster than ASP 3.0.
--ASP.NET is 3 to 5 times faster than ASP 3.0 (an interpreted script like PHP).
--ASP.NET can use built-in "Output Caching". After the page is first accessed and compiled, it can be served from cache. No page processor is faster than cache.
--In default installations, ASP.NET is compiled, PHP and ASP 3.0 are interpreted.
Now knowing that, take your best guess at which platform is faster....
The real question isn't "which is faster," but "if approach X satisfies my higher-priority criteria, will it be fast enough?"