PHP vs. ASP.NET Fight

[M. Johansson]

As far as I know, ASP.NET is still the same as ASP on the syntax/language front (JScript, VBScript), you can't write C# in ASP.NET for instance?

No, ASP.NET is completely different from ASP. All ASP.NET pages, modules, web services or whatever is coded in C#, Visual Basic.NET, J#.NET, JScript.NET or any of the other 50 .NET languages. ASP.NET does not really have a syntax of it's own - you just pick a .NET language with a syntax you like.

And, even though it's just "a big bunch of classes", you still need to implement the classes somehow.

Yeah, with C#. But then you are using the syntax of C#, not ASP.NET. C# has syntax, ASP.NET does not.

[Jeremy W.]

KTottE really needs to do some reading on ASP.NET. Forget the "ASP" part of it. Just think of it as MS's brand new, spanking great web development "thing" (not framework, not language, not environment... what the hell is Web Forms?) generally called Web Forms, but specifically referred to as ASP.NET (which is more than just Web Forms).

[lastcraft]

Hi...

You are confusing ASP.NET with .NET. ASP.NET is a subset of .NET, and are just classes, nothing else.

With respect, I am not confusing anything of the sort.

VB.NET and C# are both compiled into CLR bytecodes and are limited by those semantics and that of those core library. They are essentially the same object language with a different syntax veneer. This becomes all too apparent when you consider the languages that cannot correctly run on .NET: Python, Ruby for example.

Java cuts those bytecodes lower (but with a tighter security model). You can compile Jython (Python) into Java and write Groovy (Ruby semantics) right inside Java code. If .NET could ever be called "mutiple languages" (a bogus claim in practice as the libraries define a language as well) then Java is too.

It's just hype and irrelevant in practice.

yours, Marcus

[Jeremy W.]

Actually, Python.NET and Ruby.NET are available. Not from Microsoft, but that was really the whole point of the CLR.

[Jeremy W.]

Python: http://www.zope.org/Members/Brian/PythonNet/index_html
Ruby: http://www.innoq.com/blog/mt/archives/000222.html

[lastcraft]

Hi...

Python: http://www.zope.org/Members/Brian/PythonNet/index_html
Ruby: http://www.innoq.com/blog/mt/archives/000222.html

You cannot create trusted code with these packages (or anything at all in the Ruby one at present). The Smalltalk compiler has run into the same difficulties. Those restrictions do not apply to Jython and Groovy.

yours, Marcus

[M. Johansson]

Hi...

With respect, I am not confusing anything of the sort.

VB.NET and C# are both compiled into CLR bytecodes and are limited by those semantics and that of those core library. They are essentially the same object language with a different syntax veneer. This becomes all too apparent when you consider the languages that cannot correctly run on .NET: Python, Ruby for example.

That's all true, but ASP.NET is still just a bunch of classes. Classes doesn't have a syntax.

[KTottE]

Ah, copy on ASP.NET, my mistake.
I've only used C# within .NET, and I've only used ASP before, so I didn't know. That's why I threw the questionmark into my post before when referring to ASP.NET

[len_chan]

IIS is IIS 5.0 on a windows 2000 Pro.

Mac,

I suspect this might be why you had such poor results in ASP. Windows Desktop OS's are limited to 10 server connections at a time (so that people don't use W2KPro as a cheap webserver, it is, after all, pretty much the same OS as W2K Server).

I'm guessing that you hit the wall as far as connections go.

As to which is faster, PHP or .Net: I'll leave that for everyone else to flame over.


LC

[CandyMann_69]

In my honest humble option:

I personally think this thread has been helpful. Sure, there are some flaming going on, but also a lot of interesting information in between the lines. I try to keep an open mind to all technology. There are some amazing things happening in the world, and I intend to use any tool I can to make my life better, whether we are talking about programming or toasters.


Right now I like PHP better then ASP/ASP.NET. Why? Simple, that is what I am use to. Don’t get me wrong, ASP.NET could very well be 100 times better then PHP and that is fine with me. I am just using the tool that works for me right now. I also would like to learn more about programming in ASP/ASP.NET but let me share what happened to ME in doing that. Notice I say me, not everyone in the world.

So some years ago, I started searching the internet on PHP and found some simple tutorials. Then I got a free site that could handle PHP and MySQL and started trying to learn them. It took me some time, but each day I learned a little more, and in general PHP made sense to ME. After some years past, I became pretty good at it and in general was having fun with it, so I started looking for a job. Guess what? I found tons more ASP/ASP.NET jobs on the general job hunting web sites. So I figured it was time to learn some ASP.NET. Like before, I start searching the internet for ASP.NET information. To keep it short, after a few weeks of trying to learn ASP.NET and trying to make my server run it, I gave up. At some point in time I will try again to learn ASP.NET but for now PHP works for me.

Maybe after many years of also working with ASP.NET as well, I could give an informed option of which is better, but for now all I can say is PHP was a lot easier for me to learn and setup.

[Jeremy W.]

What made you give up? (this isn't a 'challenge' question, I'm just curious)

For me, there is so much more ASP.NET, C# and VB information out there than there is PHP info...

Waiting patiently

[CandyMann_69]

I guess I should not have said "give up", more like put it on hold. One of the major frustrations was I could not get the server part to run correctly on my system. I plan to revisit it again when I have more time to spend on it. I'm sure I will be in the sitepoint ASP.NET area asking for help.

I did get to play with some of the coding part and it did look interesting, but, at least to me, a lot more complex for beginners then PHP. From what I could tell, it seemed to have some neat features on making a desktop application and making a web application using more or less the same code. If that is so, that is a very powerful feature. I know GTK was working on that with PHP but found it a little lacking and little hard to use. I'm looking forward to the next GTK that works with PHP 5. I hope it will have some major improvements.

[Jeremy W.]

Yeah, the foundation classes are the same, which makes it a lot easier. The principles are also largely the same.

Once you get past objects and the concept of Web Forms it really does become a lot easier.

Also, a lot of the tools make things so much easier, especially with ASP.NET 2.0 where you can 'drop' membership and authentication stuff right in.

It's good, really good. If it isn't what you need, that's great, but most people who 'get' it don't turn back. Again, assuming it's the kind of thing you need to do, though more and more it makes a lot of sense (like with the new Test Driven Development being built into the next version of Visual Studio).

[geosite]

Whats that? A Microsoft product doesn't work with Netscape? Well, what did you expect from a company that has trid everything to make their web browser the only one used? Its probably just another way for Microsoft to push Netscape (and Mozilla) out of the market.

Holy cow, ASP.NET doesn't work with Netscape and Mozilla??? I have to add this to my notes. That's not a trivial factor; it's actually enormous.

Of course, saying ASP.NET's "code validation controls" don't work with Netscape isn't exactly the same as saying ASP.NET itself doesn't work with Netscape. Please help me understand the big picture, someone.

Still, this sounds like a very significant factor; if true, I'm amazed this is so seldom mentioned.

[geosite]

In my honest humble option:
So some years ago, I started searching the internet on PHP and found some simple tutorials. Then I got a free site that could handle PHP and MySQL and started trying to learn them. It took me some time, but each day I learned a little more, and in general PHP made sense to ME. After some years past, I became pretty good at it and in general was having fun with it, so I started looking for a job. Guess what? I found tons more ASP/ASP.NET jobs on the general job hunting web sites. So I figured it was time to learn some ASP.NET. Like before, I start searching the internet for ASP.NET information. To keep it short, after a few weeks of trying to learn ASP.NET and trying to make my server run it, I gave up. At some point in time I will try again to learn ASP.NET but for now PHP works for me.

That's an interesting - and predicatble - anecdote. I was a little surprised to learn that there are more ASP/ASP.NET jobs. However, it gets a big boost from the Microsoft monopoly, which really pushes its products - even on open source forums.

My perception is that the open source community generally focuses on technical matters, rather than commercial or public relations. It will be interesting to see how the jobs stack up five years from now.

[Dangermouse]

My perception is that the open source community generally focuses on technical matters, rather than commercial or public relations. It will be interesting to see how the jobs stack up five years from now.

[M. Johansson]

I was a little surprised to learn that there are more ASP/ASP.NET jobs. However, it gets a big boost from the Microsoft monopoly, which really pushes its products - even on open source forums.

You know, it could also be because .NET is an extremely solid product.

Holy cow, ASP.NET doesn't work with Netscape and Mozilla??? I have to add this to my notes. That's not a trivial factor; it's actually enormous.

ASP.NET works excellently with Mozilla. The field validation controls require some minor tinkering of you want the client script part of them to work on Mozilla, but they work just fine out-of-the box as well - it's just the client-side scripting is disabled for Mozilla.

[Terry_Dean]

It is possible to produce W3C compliant code xhtml strict 1.0! with PHP. (eg. www.sitepoint.com) So far I have not read anything that says ASP.Net can do this. Andy Garcia says that ASP.Net can produce HTML 4.0 compliant code but that it falls apart with xhtml 1.0 strict!. I would have thought this was a very good reason not to use ASP.Net.

regards,

Terry Dean

[Jeremy W.]

6 month old thread...

[M. Johansson]

6 month old thread...

Yep. Closing.