PHP vs. JSP

[M. Johansson]

You got some benchmarks? I'd like to see JSP and ASP.NET benchmarked against PHP with the Zend Accelerator installed. If JSP and ASP.NET are faster, I bet the difference is negligible.

--ed

So you like to pitch a default configuration of JSP and/or ASP.NET against a PHP installation enchanced with an accelerator product for thousands of dollars?

[coo_t2]

So you like to pitch a default configuration of JSP and/or ASP.NET against a PHP installation enchanced with an accelerator product for thousands of dollars?

Well, then how bout doing the benchmarks using this free accelerator:
http://www.php-accelerator.co.uk/

There's probably some other ones out there too.

Besides, how much money do those default configurations of JSP and ASP.NET really cost?

And if you get to the point where you really need to accelerate your scripts, chances are a few thousand bucks isn't that big of a deal. A hosting account with Zend accelerator installed is still probably less(I don't really know) than an equivalent ASP.NET/JSP hosting account.

--ed

[dhtmlgod]

For my .NET hosting account, I'm paying £2.50 a month

[asp_funda]

You got some benchmarks? I'd like to see JSP and ASP.NET benchmarked against PHP with the Zend Accelerator installed. If JSP and ASP.NET are faster, I bet the difference is negligible.

This statement of yours prove that even you doubt the speed of PHP against compiled langs like JSP & ASP.NET.

But you wouldn't agree with it, I've seen too many a loyal supporters like you. But I don't call it loyalty, only blindedness towards a better thing. I've been using ASP from my early days as a web-developer, as it was the first server-side lang that I learnt but I'm not blind. I accept changes & better things. I know that there are things better than ASP & I don't mind using them if need arises.

[asp_funda]

And if you get to the point where you really need to accelerate your scripts, chances are a few thousand bucks isn't that big of a deal. A hosting account with Zend accelerator installed is still probably less(I don't really know) than an equivalent ASP.NET/JSP hosting account.

You really don't know. JSP/ASP.NET hosting isn't such a big & expensive affair nowadays. Its just a few bucks more than normal ASP hosting. Infact, quite a number of hosts offer JSP hosting for a few bucks more than PHP hosting but I've yet to see a hosting package with Zend Accelerator.

[coo_t2]

This statement of yours prove that even you doubt the speed of PHP against compiled langs like JSP & ASP.NET.

No it doesn't. It proves that I don't assume anything.
I have no doubt that ASP.NET and JSP will be faster against an out-of-the-box install of PHP.
An accelerator probably isn't included with the PHP distribution so that Zend
can make money on their commercial accelerator(which I really see any problem with, they should be able to make money off of PHP somehow).
But if you need extra speed, go to one of these places for a free
solution:

http://php-accelerator.co.uk/
http://apc.communityconnect.com/
http://afterburner.bware.it/

Or here for a commercial solution:
http://www.zend.com/

But you wouldn't agree with it, I've seen too many a loyal supporters like you. But I don't call it loyalty, only blindedness towards a better thing. I've been using ASP from my early days as a web-developer, as it was the first server-side lang that I learnt but I'm not blind. I accept changes & better things. I know that there are things better than ASP & I don't mind using them if need arises.

I'm not a "loyal"(as in fanatical) PHP supporter. I wasn't saying that I think PHP is better(whatever that means) than the other alternatives. And I'm not sure how you came to the conclusion that I was a loyal/blind follower. Once again, you just assumed.

I'm not qualified to say which is better since I haven't used ASP.NET or JSP. There might be a lot of reasons to not choose PHP, but I don't think execution speed will be it, but of course I could be wrong.

I think you are the one who's acting blindly. In my post I suggested doing benchmarks to find out the difference in execution time. You assume, because ASP.NET and JSP are much better(in your mind), that they must be faster. So once I mention doing something reasonable like showing me benchmarks(after installing a free PHP accelerator), you get bent out of shape.

--ed

[asp_funda]

You assume, because ASP.NET and JSP are much better(in your mind), that they must be faster.

Excuse me, but I think I'm in a position to answer that question. I use ASP(not ASP.NET) & JSP/Servlets in my daily life & I've also used(& am using) PHP. So I think that I can say that JSP/Servlets is/are faster than PHP. I'm not saying that PHP is slow, but comparitively it does slow down when performing heavy duty work.
Though, the difference, like you said, is not negligible, but its quite small & shouldn't effect much. And due to the large support available to PHP, its constantly on the rise. I don't know much about it since I haven't dwelled deeper in PHP.
Also, I'm not assuming, its just logical reasoning backed by my little experience with PHP & quite a good amount of experience with JSP/Servlets.

So once I mention doing something reasonable like showing me benchmarks(after installing a free PHP accelerator), you get bent out of shape.

One way you are talking of being reasonable & other way you are trying to put enhanced PHP against a default JSP/ASP.NET?? That's not fair & too far from being reasonable. Besides me, most of the others wouldn't think it fair & resonable.



And I didn't assume that you are a loyal/blind PHP fan. I just deduced it through the way you are talking & supporting PHP(like comparing accelerated PHP against out-of-box JSP or ASP.NET).

[M. Johansson]

Well, then how bout doing the benchmarks using this free accelerator:
http://www.php-accelerator.co.uk/
Besides, how much money do those default configurations of JSP and ASP.NET really cost?

You can basically set up a JSP server for no money at all, and a ASP.NET server for the cost of Server 2003 Web Edition ($399). Also, As for PHP-accelerator, yeah, you could use that, but I (and most people) prefer to keep third-party products to a minimum. The more applications you rely on, the more complicated it gets to maintain your application.

And if you get to the point where you really need to accelerate your scripts, chances are a few thousand bucks isn't that big of a deal. A hosting account with Zend accelerator installed is still probably less(I don't really know) than an equivalent ASP.NET/JSP hosting account.

Nah. ASP.NET hosting is not very expensive.

[coo_t2]

Excuse me, but I think I'm in a position to answer that question. I use ASP(not ASP.NET) & JSP/Servlets in my daily life & I've also used(& am using) PHP. So I think that I can say that JSP/Servlets is/are faster than PHP.

And all I'm saying is: Show me the money.

One way you are talking of being reasonable & other way you are trying to put enhanced PHP against a default JSP/ASP.NET?? That's not fair & too far from being reasonable. Besides me, most of the others wouldn't think it fair & resonable.

I don't understand why it's so important to compare how the languages perform only with their default configurations. It would be different, if in the real world you couldn't change anything, but you can. If you're using PHP and you need more speed, go get an accelerator(get a free one if you don't wanna pay). If your web host doesn't have one installed, get another web host.
There's always features that some web hosts will support, and others won't,
this is just another one of those features.
It's misleading to say that PHP is slower because it has to compile the script on every request. Because in the real world when people need the speed, they just install a piece of software that takes care of that problem.

( Coincidentally, sitepoint seemed to be having trouble earlier so I was looking at the
http headers with "Live Http Headers" to see what I could see.

I happened to see this line:

X-Accelerated-By: PHPA/1.3.3r2 )

And I didn't assume that you are a loyal/blind PHP fan. I just deduced it through the way you are talking & supporting PHP(like comparing accelerated PHP against out-of-box JSP or ASP.NET).

Your deductions were wrong.
PHP is almost the only language I use, but I feel no loyalty towards it.
I like it, but it's just a tool. A tool that works for me. Just as if I were
going to use a hammer and a nail to hang a picture, I will develop no loyalty for the hammer. If I keep hitting my thumb with the hammer, and conclude that it is a
flaw in the design of the hammer -- screw that hammer, I'm getting another one.


FWIW, I'd imagine that ASP.NET and JSP/JAVA are better(in most situations) for large scale web applications, where a lot of people are involved in development.(I hope Harry isn't watching )
But I doubt it's a performance(execution speed) issue. It's probably much more a development/productivity/support issue.
Like I said before, I don't have direct experience developing with these
technologies, but I'd be surprised if ASP.NET and JSP weren't better suited to large development projects. Why? Because MS and Sun are huge corporations who have
spent a lot of time and money creating development platforms and tools to be attractive to people in corporate enviroments. These are the people they're targetting, and they've spent a lot of time and effort trying to figure out what they want and need. And the fact that they're each backed by one company who can standardize the tools/frameworks/methods used.

I've heard Mattias' arguments in other threads that relying on a bunch of third party tools as part of your development platform can be less efficient in terms of training time, and in terms of the time it takes to decide on a standard way of doing things. That argument makes sense to me.
But the "PHP is slower" argument doesn't makes sense to me.

As HarryF pointed out earlier in this thread, Amazon.com runs mod_perl, an
interpreted language. THe compiled vs. interpreted argument is just not
that valid IMHO.

--ed

[asp_funda]

I don't understand why it's so important to compare how the languages perform only with their default configurations. It would be different, if in the real world you couldn't change anything, but you can. If you're using PHP and you need more speed, go get an accelerator(get a free one if you don't wanna pay). If your web host doesn't have one installed, get another web host.

I didn't say that compare only with default settings. I just opposed your comparing of accelerated PHP with default JSP or ASP.NET. Get the guns blazing & enhance each of them & then compare. You don't compare a swordsman with a rifle shooter, do you, to see who's deadly.

As HarryF pointed out earlier in this thread, Amazon.com runs mod_perl, an
interpreted language. THe compiled vs. interpreted argument is just not
that valid IMHO.

True, we can go on like this forever, there's no limit. So its useless to discuss such things like this. I say that everything has its use in its place. JSP is fast & maybe more reliable but its tough. While ASP & PHP aren't that tough & I simply love ASP b'coz of its ease. So, everything is best suited where its needed.

[M. Johansson]

I don't understand why it's so important to compare how the languages perform only with their default configurations.

Because third party extensions are a pain in the butt.

[HarryF]

Because third party extensions are a pain in the butt.

Try telling the Perl crowd that (re CPAN).

[Zoef]

Because third party extensions are a pain in the butt.

And should the Zend Accelerator really be considered 'third party'?

Rik

[M. Johansson]

And should the Zend Accelerator really be considered 'third party'?

Rik

Aren't they a third party, then?

And Perl Crowd... Third party extensions are a pain in the butt.

[asp_funda]

And should the Zend Accelerator really be considered 'third party'?

Aren't they a third party, then?

I think that they are the people who created PHP, no? So they can't be called third party.

And Perl Crowd... Third party extensions are a pain in the butt.

You're really funny Mattias. What Harry meant to say was that Perl People usually live off 3rd party extensions with all their code libraries etc.

[M. Johansson]

I think that they are the people who created PHP, no? So they can't be called third party.

No, Zend didn't create PHP to my knowledge.

You're really funny Mattias. What Harry meant to say was that Perl People usually live off 3rd party extensions with all their code libraries etc.

Urk. I'm adding perl to my list of languages to avoid.

[asp_funda]

No, Zend didn't create PHP to my knowledge.

Either they created it or they are a major hand behind its ongoing development. If they are not the creators then they have a huge contribution in its development, no? That's why Zoef said that they can't be considered 3rd party.

Urk. I'm adding perl to my list of languages to avoid.

Its not that bad. Its just like PHP & Perl don't have a proper framework & development teams that are answerable, like in ASP/.NET & Java where Microsoft & Sun are dedicated & responsible for their development.

But PHP & Perl are open-source projects & they have a team of volunteer developers who are developing it. So, unlike PHP where the PHP development team approves of every mod & then distributes it in the default PHP binaries, Perl Libraries are available all over written by individual developers & which have not passed approval of the Perl Development Team.

Also, Perl is quite outdated. Only ole pros use it. Others use PHP(on *nix servers) & ASP/ASP.NET(on Windows servers) & Java & ColdFusion.
I for one, switched over from Perl to ASP within 2months. I couldn't stand Perl, it was killing me.

[coledavis]

While I sympathise with the 'any language gets you there' argument, and recognise the cost implications (I have to pay for JSP hosting), I have another factor to look at. AOL users are having difficulty using my Java servlets. Will PHP be less subject to these browser-specific problems?

[M. Johansson]

While I sympathise with the 'any language gets you there' argument, and recognise the cost implications (I have to pay for JSP hosting), I have another factor to look at. AOL users are having difficulty using my Java servlets. Will PHP be less subject to these browser-specific problems?

PHP and JSP are both server side, and as such produce no client problems. Those are in your code.

[vgarcia]

PHP and JSP are both server side, and as such produce no client problems. Those are in your code.

The server-side problem may be exhibited on the client side though (cookies, improper caching, etc.).

[asterix]

The server-side problem may be exhibited on the client side though (cookies, improper caching, etc.).

But those problems can be created with any platform / language.

[vgarcia]

But those problems can be created with any platform / language.

True, I was just saying that it may not be all on the client. Some of his server-side code could be the culprit (though I agree that switching away from servlets won't solve the problem).

[asterix]

Some of his server-side code could be the culprit (though I agree that switching away from servlets won't solve the problem).

Sure.

In my experience, Java and esp. JSP are being squeezed massively between PHP and ASP.NET. Of course Java is still going strong, but it is becoming a niche market.

PHP is definitely for the masses, and ASP.NET is very popular among small to medium sized (Microsoft dominated) organizations. That leaves large corporations at the top with their huge commitment to Java, and not much else.

Just my 2$

[vgarcia]

PHP is definitely for the masses, and ASP.NET is very popular among small to medium sized (Microsoft dominated) organizations. That leaves large corporations at the top with their huge commitment to Java, and not much else.

The last few companies I've worked in have been medium-sized "Microsoft dominated" (as you put it) organizations, and I've used JSP. The company I currently work at even builds Windows-based software and we use JSP everywhere. I think the market is more divided than you think, but I have a feeling that the divisions could also be more of a regional/geographic thing.

[asterix]

...I have a feeling that the divisions could also be more of a regional/geographic thing.

Yes, definitely.

Here in Germany the IT departments of large companies are either pro or anti-microsoft, it is a political position. Unfortunately, it is not always a technological decision. Many IT-pros here are anti-Microsoft as an expression of being anti George W. Bush, they have the feeling that buying and evengelizing Microsoft products is the same as voting republican and fighting wara in Iraq / Afghanistan. Of course the argument is ridiculous, MS is not responsible for any of that stuff at all.

I don't thing that is right, I think that each company's products (or each technology) should be judged on merit and not on political ideology, but that's not how the world works.

Obviously this effect does not apply to the US, and I am 90% sure that it also does not apply to the UK (I've worked there a lot too). It would be interesting to here from non anglophone members what the situation is like in other countries.

PS
Yes, Java is effectively from the US too, but Sun is (mistakenly) not perceived as being dominant, bossy and uncle-sam macho.