SitePoint Sponsor |
|
User Tag List
Results 51 to 75 of 142
-
Dec 12, 2005, 19:21 #51
- Join Date
- Aug 2005
- Location
- Santa Rosa, CA
- Posts
- 67
- Mentioned
- 0 Post(s)
- Tagged
- 0 Thread(s)
Originally Posted by ShytKicka
I also don't trust closed source. What if the company that develops the product or technology decides to radically alter it in a future version? What if they get bought? What if they discontinue it? With open source, that danger is non-existent because the code is there. You can work on it and support it -- or in extreme cases, fork it. WordPress, one of the most successful PHP apps around, started as a fork of a discontinued blog app.
The argument against open source in terms of its reliability are pretty laughable considering that the entire computer industry, including the Internet, would come crashing to its knees if all of the open source software powering a lot of it stopped working. It's like arguing that the Sun is really unstable and might explode tomorrow. Sure, it's always a possibility, but that certainly hasn't happened in the past 6000+ years (or billions if that's your thing).
JaredWillowgarden: rapid application platform for PHP 5
xajax: fast and easy PHP Ajax library
Web software architecture blog: The Idea Basket
-
Dec 12, 2005, 19:40 #52
- Join Date
- Oct 2001
- Location
- Vancouver BC Canada
- Posts
- 2,037
- Mentioned
- 5 Post(s)
- Tagged
- 0 Thread(s)
Originally Posted by ShytKicka
As far as quality goes, here's a little something to chew on:
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,4149,1420487,00.aspAndrew Wasson | www.lunadesign.org
Principal / Internet Development
-
Dec 13, 2005, 01:59 #53
- Join Date
- Jan 2004
- Location
- Oslo, Norway
- Posts
- 894
- Mentioned
- 0 Post(s)
- Tagged
- 0 Thread(s)
Originally Posted by lastcraft
The way object-orientation was introduced in Perl 5 is a case in point. It's extremely simple in the sense that very little was added to the language to achieve it. There's the "bless" function that transforms anything into an object of a given class and a few small pieces of syntactic sugar. That's about it, if I remember correctly.
That doesn't mean the object-oriented code you can write in Perl is as simple as possible. Quite the contrary.
I'm not sure this distinction is clear to the PHP developers.
EDIT: See also Martin Fowler's discussion of humane interfaces.Dagfinn Reiersøl
PHP in Action / Blog / Twitter
"Making the impossible possible, the possible easy,
and the easy elegant" -- Moshe Feldenkrais
-
Dec 13, 2005, 03:41 #54
I have read through this thread and aside from a few remarks about buzz words no one has tried to define "enterprise ready". You can't very well say PHP is or is not something without knowing what that something entails. What are the traits of an "enterprise ready" language?
I am interested in this because I am writing a report on enterprise database techniques and technology and why open source PHP projects don't use them.
A few of the things that I would say that would make PHP not "enterprise ready" are:
1)no native unicode support
2)cannot be compiled (uses c to compile its components) and is in all senses a scripting only language unlike Perl and some others that can actually do whatever C language does. Cold Fusion had this problem also but now they have melded it so close to Java that it is not as noticable a drawback.
3)PHP has a very shallow reach into the operations of the webserver and OS. This becomes evident trying to control user access permissions and other items.
4)no multi-threading support (at least I have never seen a multi-threaded PHP application)
5)light weight memory handling with none available on certain OSesFHQK ed UP - It's a really FHQK ed UP world we live in!
Hiveminds Magazine
Search Engine for Drupal
Search Engine for Students
-
Dec 13, 2005, 05:16 #55
- Join Date
- Jan 2005
- Location
- Denmark
- Posts
- 1,222
- Mentioned
- 0 Post(s)
- Tagged
- 0 Thread(s)
Business Case. In an enterprise the going wisdom is that you are accountable for everything you do. Every hour you work (and thus should be paid for) must be accounted for, so that in the end the correct customer/dept can be invoiced.
Budgets and accounts rules. Love it or hate it, but that's the way enterprises work.
Before you can launch a project a business case has to be made. The business case details the benefits (predicted value) and the predicted cost. Typically, a management forum will process potential projects, look into their business cases and consider the projects role in the overall business strategy. Then, on basis of that, they will decide for each suggested project whether to give a go-ahead, reject, postpone or ask for revision/further details.
More important, good management always keep a wary eye on the running cost of capacity and ownership. The only thing they loathe more than high, recurring costs are unpredicted costs.
In the typical enterprise, (percieved) predictablity is everything. You don't want to launch a project without having a somewhat reliable estimation of the costs incurred by the project.
But the absolutely most unwelcome kind of costs are unpredicted costs originating from his/hers choice of platforms or tools. This is so because of mainly two concerns: 1) there's no project (and thus no budget account) which could be stretched to absorb the costs, and b) the choice of platform/tools are the sole responsibility of the IT organisation. And with the responsibility comes the blame.
Realizing that roadmaps and promises are just that, the typical manager responsible for making platform/tools choices will instictively look at platform/tool history and at the organisation behind the platform/tool.
In this light PHP does not come across as a good choice. Consider the following (I'll be wearing my asbestos suit in a minute):
- Releases (also point releases) have broken backward compatibility, while security concerns forcing you to upgrade. An enterprise may have 100s of projects to consider. Operations must be allowed to do an upgrade of the platform with the expectation that only a few apps will encounter problems. In an enterprise it's not the developer who has the responsibility of the platform!
- There's evidence of mavericks making project decisions which clearly had not been thorougly discussed.
- Fluctuating concepts: Older functions rely on the programmer to check return codes, while more recent libraries may rely on exceptions. Procedural language-turned-half-OO. Weakly/dynamically typed but still introducing type hinting.
- Samples of facilities which were percieved as smart at the time of inception, but later have proven to lead to unstable and - worse - exploitable code. Think "register globals" or paramerized includes.
- Fragmented community: Everybody does their own class library. May work for independant developers, but it's a non starter in the enterprise.
- Performance considerations. Even with an accellerator, even quoting google, there's still concerns about performance/scalability.
- Concerns about specialised resources. An enterpise does other projects than web projects. So far PHP is percieved as a web-only tool.
PHP may get there, but my guess is that PHP must prove itself with the 6.x platform. If 6.x proves stable, predictable, performant, scalable, productive, managable and secure, and with the backing of the likes of IBM and Oracle, it might just cut it around 7.0.
Whether or not PHP is a technically viable alternative for the enterprise now is merely the first step. PHP must also prove worthy in the sometimes surreal and sub-optimizing reality which is the enterprise of today. Whether you like Microsoft or not, like Sun or not, like IBM or not - they are all more defendable choices, simply because they are who they are. If PHP are to overcome this intrinsic unfairness, PHP must excel in preditability, robustness, security and productivity./mouse
-
Dec 13, 2005, 05:22 #56
- Join Date
- Sep 2004
- Location
- Zagreb, Croatia
- Posts
- 830
- Mentioned
- 0 Post(s)
- Tagged
- 0 Thread(s)
Originally Posted by Carl
PHP should be considered exclusively under these considerations -- despite the presence of PHP-GTK and Winbinder, it's not a language to use for general development, only for server-side Web applications and probably shell scripting. So, there is no wonder it has no compiling, multithreading and memory handling (as for the other two complaints, I agree for unicode, while it has quite a good support for Web server features, though not for OS).
So, don't expect PHP to be what it isn't, it's like complaining that you don't have a TV, a bar and a nitro-booster in your Yugo.
-
Dec 13, 2005, 05:35 #57
- Join Date
- Nov 2004
- Location
- Southampton, UK
- Posts
- 537
- Mentioned
- 0 Post(s)
- Tagged
- 0 Thread(s)
it's like complaining that you don't have a TV, a bar and a nitro-booster in your Yugo.
-
Dec 13, 2005, 05:38 #58
Originally Posted by BerislavLopac
FHQK ed UP - It's a really FHQK ed UP world we live in!
Hiveminds Magazine
Search Engine for Drupal
Search Engine for Students
-
Dec 13, 2005, 06:16 #59
- Join Date
- Sep 2004
- Location
- Zagreb, Croatia
- Posts
- 830
- Mentioned
- 0 Post(s)
- Tagged
- 0 Thread(s)
The term "enterprise-ready" means absolutely nothing. Or, to be more precise, it means many things to many people, which is essentially nothing.
-
Dec 13, 2005, 07:09 #60
Originally Posted by BerislavLopac
-
Dec 13, 2005, 07:18 #61
- Join Date
- Jan 2004
- Location
- Oslo, Norway
- Posts
- 894
- Mentioned
- 0 Post(s)
- Tagged
- 0 Thread(s)
Originally Posted by Benjymouse
Dagfinn Reiersøl
PHP in Action / Blog / Twitter
"Making the impossible possible, the possible easy,
and the easy elegant" -- Moshe Feldenkrais
-
Dec 13, 2005, 07:23 #62
- Join Date
- Sep 2000
- Location
- Halmstad, Sweden
- Posts
- 7,400
- Mentioned
- 1 Post(s)
- Tagged
- 0 Thread(s)
This discussion is very nice. It doesn't take to ordinary PHP/Enterprise spin, but actually gives a lot of real, tangliable insights why PHP haven't established itself in enterprises.
Mattias Johansson
Short, Swedish, Web Developer
Buttons and Dog Tags with your custom design:
FatStatement.com
-
Dec 13, 2005, 07:23 #63
- Join Date
- Jan 2004
- Location
- Oslo, Norway
- Posts
- 894
- Mentioned
- 0 Post(s)
- Tagged
- 0 Thread(s)
Originally Posted by Scheisskopf
-
Dec 13, 2005, 09:18 #64
- Join Date
- Jan 2005
- Location
- Ireland
- Posts
- 349
- Mentioned
- 0 Post(s)
- Tagged
- 0 Thread(s)
It seem PHP is stuck: If it breaks BC, it is not enterprise ready, however, if it doesn't break it (ie. the language flaws are removed), then it is also not enterprise ready. I think PHP 6, if it acts as a fresh start, could be enterprise ready for new projects. And as long as they do it well, backwards compatibility could be maintained as best as possible throughout all further versions.
-
Dec 13, 2005, 09:36 #65
- Join Date
- Jan 2003
- Posts
- 5,748
- Mentioned
- 0 Post(s)
- Tagged
- 0 Thread(s)
PHP is not "enterprise ready" because most enterprises would not naturally opt for something that has such a narrow field of usage.
Of course it's not. You certainly couldn't describe it as being Enterprise Ready, or otherwise, based on that comparison
-
Dec 13, 2005, 10:02 #66
- Join Date
- Dec 2002
- Location
- Switzerland
- Posts
- 735
- Mentioned
- 0 Post(s)
- Tagged
- 0 Thread(s)
To add on the PHP "not enterprise-readiness", I'd say the fact that java exists contribute to it.
Almost all the advantages of using PHP that are related to its open-sourceness are also applicable to java: most java applications rely on open-source software (struts, hibernate, spring, jboss, tomcat, eclipse, just to name a few). I don't want to turn the discussion in a java vs php threads, but the question really is why would an enterprise make the strategic decision of using PHP rather than java, when most of PHP's strengths are also Java's, and the developper availability is greater for java, it's already used by many enterprises, and the CIO has actually heard about it.
PHP needs to differentiate from Java (which it seems it's not trying since each PHP release brings it closer to sun's language) to find an enterprise audience.
-
Dec 13, 2005, 10:29 #67
- Join Date
- Aug 2004
- Location
- New York
- Posts
- 120
- Mentioned
- 0 Post(s)
- Tagged
- 0 Thread(s)
Originally Posted by mx2k
Coldfusion is pure Java at run-time. And it always will be pure Java. Since the syntax is different, it doesn't make it a different language, what is executing this syntax code? Java. When the Coldfusion files are first ran after server start-up, or after editing the file, they are dynamically pre-compiled into Java Bytecode which is stored in the server's memory. The executed code at run-time is the Java Bytecode. Please, you're right, don't waste your time, because you have no clue who you're talking to, and what you are talking about.
It is no problem to pick up the syntax for any language, what you think your little php scripties that sell for $4 bucks are so much better? And if anything, I'd be supporting the language that is easier to develop for, and that is basically why Coldfusion sells, because of its tag-based syntax. And guess what, you can't argue that it is too easy because Coldfusion also has a script-based syntax, that is familiar to Javascript and all the other web developing languages you've seen, or haven't seen for that matter.
Why bother arguing with script kiddies, please get out of here and sell your little polls for $3 bucks instead.
-
Dec 13, 2005, 10:33 #68
- Join Date
- Aug 2003
- Location
- Toronto
- Posts
- 300
- Mentioned
- 0 Post(s)
- Tagged
- 0 Thread(s)
Originally Posted by BerislavLopac
-
Dec 13, 2005, 10:45 #69
- Join Date
- May 2004
- Location
- Netherlands
- Posts
- 219
- Mentioned
- 0 Post(s)
- Tagged
- 0 Thread(s)
What I find interesting is that I don't even agree to PHP NOT being enterprise-ready?!?! Where do you base that on? I'd by now be ready to deploy PHP in enterprise applications, why not?
Quaint Tech - Blog on web development and web technology.
-
Dec 13, 2005, 11:01 #70
Originally Posted by ShytKicka
c#and vb.net are not scripts. both are compiled into msil. but i see that you missed those in your obvious frustration of proving an unfounded point. And i did state that cold fusion compiles into javabyte code,
but there is only so much you can do with server tags/scripts, which is what cold fusion is, you said so yourself.
Could you code in java and use it with cold fusion, if i am not mistaken, you can along with com objects, but if you knew that, i'm sure you would have posted it instead of using the arguement about scripting......
the same priciple would go for people that just use server controls/user controls for asp.net. Which leaves you limited, why not be free to use language itself, ie java or if you are using asp.net, c#/vb.net etc?
you use markup tags and a little bit of scripting similar to javascript and you dare to start name calling in a php forum? ooookkk.
and please stop trying using words to sound elite. at least i do admit to being the village idiot. script kiddies take code that someone else has written and tweak it for themselves and then run around mistyping words on IRC and use words like NoOb because they KeWl. I don't know of any "script kiddies" that actually try to sell code.
and techinically speaking, i could compile php into MSIL by using Phalanger.
i didn't say coldfusion is terrible, but i don't see it being better than php, or that ease of use markup was a good trade off with being stuck running a J2EE compliant application server or JRun.
as for who you are? who cares. you brought an unprofessional attitude into this thread and presented weak arguments, its probably best that no one knows who you are. Good Day to you sir!Last edited by mx2k; Dec 13, 2005 at 12:36.
-
Dec 13, 2005, 12:09 #71
Originally Posted by ShytKicka
Originally Posted by ShytKicka
Originally Posted by ShytKicka
Originally Posted by ShytKicka
-
Dec 13, 2005, 12:35 #72
- Join Date
- Aug 2004
- Location
- California
- Posts
- 1,672
- Mentioned
- 0 Post(s)
- Tagged
- 0 Thread(s)
Originally Posted by Carl
Christopher
-
Dec 13, 2005, 12:40 #73
- Join Date
- Jun 2003
- Location
- Iowa, USA
- Posts
- 3,749
- Mentioned
- 0 Post(s)
- Tagged
- 0 Thread(s)
Originally Posted by arborint
For the product salesman/marketer: "It is going to cost your company a lot of money to run my product, but I am going to take your CIO on a golf outing to make sure we are defined as the only acceptable standard"
and to the techie it means: "I don't know how these goofy corporate standards keep getting defined, I can do the same thing faster for free with this"
Jason Sweat ZCE - jsweat_php@yahoo.com
Book: PHP Patterns
Good Stuff: SimpleTest PHPUnit FireFox ADOdb YUI
Detestable (adjective): software that isn't testable.
-
Dec 13, 2005, 12:46 #74
- Join Date
- Jan 2003
- Posts
- 5,748
- Mentioned
- 0 Post(s)
- Tagged
- 0 Thread(s)
i didn't say coldfusion is terrible,
Another disadvantage of ColdFusion is price - an important factor. Fair enough the price may well have fallen, I don't know, but I do know that 18 months ago it was costly.
Your rather obnoxious and condescending stance doesn't really help your argument.
Like, I can't even take those comments as being serious
-
Dec 13, 2005, 12:58 #75
- Join Date
- Aug 2003
- Location
- Toronto
- Posts
- 300
- Mentioned
- 0 Post(s)
- Tagged
- 0 Thread(s)
There is no specific definition because it is both a marketing term and a techinical term. To marketers it means "My product will meet your company's needs" and to a techie it means "I got that product to meet my company's needs".
Take "load balanced", "connection pooled", "reverse proxied" -- at least those have some semblence of a technical meaning. Yet the marketing pundits will come in and discuss "scalability". "Enterprise Ready" comes from the lexicon of those who don't necessarily understand the finer points of technology (such as the point of this forum: application design). I posit that decision makers do not have nearly the same set of guiding principles as technologists.
Bookmarks