SitePoint Sponsor

User Tag List

Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 76 to 100 of 148
  1. #76
    SitePoint Addict
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Posts
    302
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Originally posted by firepages
    [B
    That PHP's OO is not up to scratch is a) changing and b) irrelevant as both JAVA and ASP & .NET have their own difficiencies (from the ideal at least ... not that there is an ideal implementation nor can there ever be since thats subjective )
    [/B]
    The fact that no language is perfect is not an excuse for the fact that PHP's OO has even more defficiencies. Okay so PHP are making improvements to the OO, good, as you seem to think this makes the argument of PHP's OO less then valid does this also to extend to the arguments put forward about .nets platform dependence given that people are working on various incarnations of the .net framework for most platforms.

  2. #77
    SitePoint Wizard silver trophy Jeremy W.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    9,123
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Originally posted by firepages
    wrong, it isnt designed for the way you currently work & thats cool ! but it is quite capable of much more than you give it credit for, and the moment you start to do something even slightly different than the norm then it shines, brilliantly and quickly and cheaply.
    And yet you won't give other technologies the same credit? Come on guys, I've said time and again that PHP is amazing, and certainly shines on the web, it does, but I have yet to see any massive projects done in PHP, in which PHP truly shines for any other reason than the skills of the developer.
    SVP Marketing, SoCast SRM
    Personal blog: Strategerize
    Twitter: @jeremywright

  3. #78
    ********* wombat firepages's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Perth Australia
    Posts
    1,717
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    and yet you won't give other technologies the same credit?
    well I dont really need to - that .NET & J2EE are enterprise capable is not an issue (well J2EE for certain, .NET has not been around long enough to proove itself yet (not that I really suspect otherwise)), that PHP can cut it as well is more the stick I am poking with.

    As for major projects in PHP ... I know that HarryF gavr a nice list in another thread somewhere some of which were quite a surprise (for me at least) but I already knew that Deutche-bank makes heavy use of PHP both internally and for many of its web-sites (not suggesting that its crunching your interest rates or anything) , and in a similar fashion for lufthansa ... in fact PHP seems very popular with many large German corporations for some reason?

    PHP already runs many large projects and PHP as Personal Home Page dies a death some time ago now.
    Last edited by firepages; Sep 16, 2002 at 05:07.

  4. #79
    SitePoint Wizard silver trophy Jeremy W.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    9,123
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I didn't say PHP can't do it, but whether PHP can cut it is definitely something else. Why do I use PHP for projects? Because it allows me to do things quick and dirty, even more so than ASP did. Nothing wrong with that, and I know it's possible to make PHP behave cleanly.

    My contention isn't that PHP can't do it, but that it doesn't seem (to me) to be the best tool for the job. To what degree are German corps using PHP? The fact that a company uses a technology isn't the same as endorsing it. Heck, we run Macs here, but we don't like them for a variety of reasons.
    SVP Marketing, SoCast SRM
    Personal blog: Strategerize
    Twitter: @jeremywright

  5. #80
    SitePoint Wizard gold trophysilver trophy
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    2,479
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    As to this neils OO point, here's a prime example of what PHP's current OO support can achieve: http://www.students.cs.uu.nl/people/...api/index.html - the documentation to Vincents Eclipse library - looking pretty Java like isn't it.

    have had many a pleasant argument with JAVA heads who for all thier brilliance could still not understand that load-balancing is not language specific, that multi-tier'd environments too are not language specific
    Exactly!

    The bottom line here is, no matter how much any Java or .NET developer would like to write PHP off as something for developing MyFirstHomepage with, PHP is working it's way into the enterprise. Right now it's lacking in "add ons" as we know but thanks to the J2EE / .NET scrap, many corporations are going to be wondering where to go so PHP has got plenty of time to catch up.

  6. #81
    SitePoint Wizard silver trophy Jeremy W.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    9,123
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Just getting back to the article again, since we've strayed so far, I'm just realising that most of the points in the article have nothing to do with .NET, but more with "everyone else's" perception of PHP, or they are not anything I've ever heard anyone say:

    "1. PHP is like an open source .NET"
    ... erm, who has ever said this that knows anything about .NET?

    "2. .NET is going to be the future of the Internet!"
    Could be, but there isn't any rebuttal in the article...

    "3. .NET is the best technology for building a Website."
    Again, opinion, but I've never heard anyone say that. PHP guys will counter with "it's the best technology for you" and then, often in the same sentence, say "PHP is the best for small sites"...

    "4. PHP is not compiled, other than when it's interpreted at runtime, whereas .NET enjoys all the benefits of being compiled."
    Again, this isn't a .NET myth, this is a PHP myth.

    "5. ASP.NET has accountable support. PHP has none."
    Again, no rebuttal to the .NET point, he's dispelling PHP myths.

    "6. .NET supports multiple languages. PHP doesn't."
    Ditto.

    "7. Language.NET has superior object orientation."
    We've already covered this, and the "myth" stands. Besides, what is language.net?

    "8. .NET offers superior templating and web development features."
    Again, Harry doesn't dispell any myths, he admits that the above statement is true, and then says "if you get an addon PHP can do it too".

    "9. But corporations don't like PHP."
    Again, nothing to do with .NET...

    "10. PHP is doomed!"


    ... Sorry, just trying to get back to the point of the article... Which .NET myths does it actually dispel. What does it do besides make the PHP community feel good for another couple of weeks?
    SVP Marketing, SoCast SRM
    Personal blog: Strategerize
    Twitter: @jeremywright

  7. #82
    SitePoint Wizard silver trophy Jeremy W.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    9,123
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Originally posted by HarryF
    The bottom line here is, no matter how much any Java or .NET developer would like to write PHP off as something for developing MyFirstHomepage with, PHP is working it's way into the enterprise. Right now it's lacking in "add ons" as we know but thanks to the J2EE / .NET scrap, many corporations are going to be wondering where to go so PHP has got plenty of time to catch up.
    I don't think that is the bottom line. I haven't seen any evidence that PHP is a better choice for enterprise. The "we can do that" or "corporations will one day wonder..." types of statements aren't going to make anybody change their minds. The statement was made above, and I'll tend to generally agree: This isn't changing anyone's minds, it's just educating.

    Corps will stay with what they've invested in. To say "well, if they haven't invested in anything, than PHP should be the top choice" isn't even a valid statement either. How many corps haven't invested in anything? I mean, how many corps start out without any internal processes and with all employees having equal skills across OS's and development environments?

    If a corp has invested in xNix, they will likely stay there. If .NET ever goes to xNix then that will be an option for them. But, for now, they will likely stay with xNix tools. Heck, even if .NET did make it to xNix, the xNix marketing machine (ie: paranoid community) would still find reasons to demean it.

    My experience, in general, with the "Open Source Community" is that it really isn't about the best technology, but about being self-proud and pointing at a few bright shining lights.

    Let each technology speak for itself with where it's at now. Don't say "well, if you install this, wait for the next version, have profficient programmers and switch your database to one we like, then you'll have great results". .NET stands on it's own, let PHP do the same not so it can fall, but so that it can stand. It's a great technology, why can't the Open Source community say the say of .NET?
    SVP Marketing, SoCast SRM
    Personal blog: Strategerize
    Twitter: @jeremywright

  8. #83
    SitePoint Addict mgkimsal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 1999
    Posts
    209
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    "7. Language.NET has superior object orientation."
    We've already covered this, and the "myth" stands. Besides, what is language.net?
    I think 'language.net' refers to any language running under the .net banner.

    When referring to any particular shortcoming in implementation, people get told 'no, we're not talking about c#, we're talking about asp.net' (or vb.net, or COBOL or the myriad other languages people refer to). Or 'it doesn't matter what language you want to run - .net runs them all!'.

    Any language .net runs is going to have more similarities than differences, due to the CLR structure - everything has to be able to operate similarly once reduced to the CLR. So
    'language.net' is a shorthand way of saying 'any language that runs under .net'. At least that's been my interpretation of it - I wondered the same thing too first time I saw it.
    Michael Kimsal
    =============================
    groovymag.com - for groovy/grails developers
    jsmag.com - for javascript developers

  9. #84
    SitePoint Wizard silver trophy Jeremy W.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    9,123
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Either way, the "myth" still stands. .NET does have superior OO. The only rebuttal I've heard is that "OO isn't necessarily better" or "PHP will soon have decent OO".
    SVP Marketing, SoCast SRM
    Personal blog: Strategerize
    Twitter: @jeremywright

  10. #85
    SitePoint Addict mgkimsal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 1999
    Posts
    209
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    paranoid

    the xNix marketing machine (ie: paranoid community)
    I don't think the 'paranoia' isn't completely unjustified. MS has more cash sitting in the bank than most annual South American GDPs combined.

    I can NOT for the life of me remember the article, but Bill Gates recently reminded some interviewer that they are a 'franchise', similar to IBM, Sun, Adobe, Apple and others. He then went on to say that franchises knock each other out of different spaces, then asked when the last time MS got knocked out of a particularfranchise arena by a competitor.

    MS has had some 'mistakes' and arguably has failed in the past (BOB, 'sidewalk' (imo), etc). But when they've 'failed' it's normally been due to stupid ideas, not because someone else knocked them out. They've successfully knocked out competition and competitors in multiple fields, and they're one of the few companies that has the cash to win by attrition if they want something bad enough.

    They seem to be wanting the 'web' arena more and more, and people rightly *should* be somewhat paranoid about MS coming into their arena. While there's competition, they 'innovate' (however loosely that is defined). Once there's no competition, there's little incentive *to* innovate/progress/whatever. It's less a 'marketing' reaction than simple self-preservation.
    Michael Kimsal
    =============================
    groovymag.com - for groovy/grails developers
    jsmag.com - for javascript developers

  11. #86
    SitePoint Addict mgkimsal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 1999
    Posts
    209
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    OO

    Either way, the "myth" still stands. .NET does have superior OO. The only rebuttal I've heard is that "OO isn't necessarily better" or "PHP will soon have decent OO".
    From a developer's standpoint (excluding system libraries) OO *often* doesn't mean much to many people because most people that use it still don't 'get it', or misuse it, or whatever.

    However, from a system library standpoint, both Java and .NET have extensive libraries that rely on solid OO, and this has allowed both technologies to develop good frameworks using OO. , which does benefit developers, even if they don't fully understand OO themselves.
    Michael Kimsal
    =============================
    groovymag.com - for groovy/grails developers
    jsmag.com - for javascript developers

  12. #87
    SitePoint Wizard silver trophy Jeremy W.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    9,123
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I know where the xNix community is coming from, but for me, as Lead Developer for a decently sized corp it's all about what is best for the project and the future of the corp. I chose .NET becuase I knew it would one day run on xNix.

    The reality is that I fielded misconceptions on ASP for 2 years. Misconceptions fueled daily by the xNix community. It won't get any better with .NET, and the article above is just the tip of the iceberg.

    "From a developer's standpoint (excluding system libraries) OO *often* doesn't mean much to many people because most people that use it still don't 'get it', or misuse it, or whatever."

    But that isn't the point. The article was trying to dispel a myth. It didn't. .NET's OO is far superior. The fact that some people don't want it or need it isn't the point really
    SVP Marketing, SoCast SRM
    Personal blog: Strategerize
    Twitter: @jeremywright

  13. #88
    SitePoint Wizard gold trophysilver trophy
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    2,479
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Jeremy; now you're being pedantic. ".NET myths" refers both to .NET and and misconceptions held by .NET advocates when comparing it with PHP.

    Some points, like Microsofts use of the word "compile" are .NET myths.

    Others were myths commonly held by .NET advocates in regard to PHP, for example that PHP's OO support is poor.

    The general point was, a few months ago we had people claiming .NET was that answer to everything from landing a man on the moon, making your toast and taking the kids to school.

    In comparison to PHP, all sorts of wild claims were made, many based on MS hype and misinformation.

    But reality is creeping back in and everyone is slowly coming to the realisation that as far as building web sites goes, ASP.NET is nothing more than ASP 4.0.

    Compared to PHP, it has a few extra widgets but fails to address some of the critical points like cross platform support - the big one where PHP has no competition except for it's good friend Perl.

    Otherwise Jeremy, you're ranting;

    It didn't. .NET's OO is far superior. The fact that some people don't want it or need it isn't the point really
    Actually .NET's OO will be inferior to PHP's come PHP 4.3 (we're on 4.2.3 right now). Destructors anyone?

    As to Mono on dotgnu - we'll have to see. .NET isn't cross platform now and all previous experience would suggest if you're depending on xNix support, you'd be insane to choose it. My prediction is all we'll have is another Chillisoft or Tomcat - dodgy implementations in other words.
    Last edited by HarryF; Sep 16, 2002 at 07:28.

  14. #89
    SitePoint Wizard silver trophy Jeremy W.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    9,123
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Ah, but cross platform support is addressed. MS just made the stupid mistake of not going all the way. It went farther than anyone thought it would, but not as far as I personally would have hoped.
    SVP Marketing, SoCast SRM
    Personal blog: Strategerize
    Twitter: @jeremywright

  15. #90
    SitePoint Wizard gold trophysilver trophy
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    2,479
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    How can I make this simple enough?

    Ah, but cross platform support is addressed. MS just made the stupid mistake of not going all the way. It went farther than anyone thought it would, but not as far as I personally would have hoped.
    Where? Where is production level Mono or dotgnu server? Looking at http://www.go-mono.com/ I keep seeing .html ?!? Why is that?

    Companies will only trust their business to .NET on Unix if MS puts it there.

    But PHP, right here and now, runs at production level on Windows, xNix and Mac. True cross platform support built by the PHP Group and the heart of their software.

  16. #91
    SitePoint Wizard silver trophy Jeremy W.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    9,123
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Dude, *L*, calm down. I didn't say ".NET is cross platform". I simply said that the issue was addressed. It wasn't solved, MS made a half-arsed attempt which was admittedly better than anyone thought they'd do.

    I'm not laying my hopes on the Mono Project at all. The heart of the software of .NET is just as cross-platform as PHP is. The only issue is that MS didn't go as far as the PHP Group did.

    Shortcoming? Yes. But to say that MS didn't consider it, or that the issue is unaddressed is to not understand how .NET works or was designed.
    SVP Marketing, SoCast SRM
    Personal blog: Strategerize
    Twitter: @jeremywright

  17. #92
    SitePoint Evangelist
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    592
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The heart of the software of .NET is just as cross-platform as PHP is.
    LOL! Come on, Jeremy. Either you haven't read enough .NET articles (which I find hard to believe) or you weren't thinking when you wrote this, because it's far from the truth.

    Making the CLR platform independent isn't the hardest part. The Mono project achieved that pretty fast. The problem is porting the various libraries (like Windows Forms). These are tightly integrated into the Windows OS, and are very hard to port. If they can be ported at all.

    Microsoft have promised cross-platformness before (COM), but they never yet delivered. It would be very foolish to believe they will this time. Because they won't.

    Now, about the 'compiling' thingie again. Yes, .NET compiles, but not to a specific architecture. Just like Java, the code is COMPILED to some kind of byte-code (IL in this case), which is then INTERPRETED inside a virtual machine. The VM is still an interpreter, yet a very large one. The Zend Encoder does this as well, so this part of the ".NET myth" is a plain lie.

    Vincent

  18. #93
    morphine for a wooden leg randem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    .chicago.il.us
    Posts
    957
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Originally posted by Jeremy W.
    Dude, *L*, calm down. I didn't say ".NET is cross platform"...
    I'm not laying my hopes on the Mono Project at all.
    Yes... you basically did. Shall we remind you?
    Originally posted by Jeremy W.
    ...as Lead Developer for a decently sized corp it's all about what is best for the project and the future of the corp. I chose .NET becuase I knew it would one day run on xNix.
    Based on my understanding of the English language, the essence of what you said there is a)I believe dotnet is the best solution for my company because b)I believe it will be cross-platform.

    So in essence, you bet your company's future on the Mono project. That's not what I'd call a strong business sense...
    ----Adopt-a-Sig----
    Your message here!

  19. #94
    SitePoint Wizard silver trophy Jeremy W.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    9,123
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I wasn't betting on Mono at all. I could drum up a 1M$ budget which should be sufficient to make all our projects run on xNix if it was required.

    Vincent: The heart of .NET is just as cross platform as PHP is. The fact that things like Windows Forms, etc, rely on Windows really is besides the point. That's not the core of .NET, is it? The porting of the class libraries, ASP.NET and Windows Forms really is the biggest things left to Mono, and they are making tremendous headway.

    Why's it taking so long? They're trying to do everything that the MS delivery did. Good on 'em too, but we've already done a Windows app that'll run on xNix, didn't take very long. It didn't do much, but considering it was only a week's worth of work, I'm entirely confident Mono can do what they need to.

    Even if they can't though, the basis of .NET is really simple: Get the OS-specific "runny-thingy" (sorry, just came out of a meeting) and the applications will run.

    But, I'll stand here and wave my little red flag and pretend to be caught if you want. I know that it can be done though, because we've done it
    SVP Marketing, SoCast SRM
    Personal blog: Strategerize
    Twitter: @jeremywright

  20. #95
    Wanna-be Apple nut silver trophy M. Johansson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Halmstad, Sweden
    Posts
    7,400
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Okay, as this thread just wroomed laps around my attention span, I'm not gonna try to respond to every post made, as that would eat up all of my evening, but I wish to summarize, and post this just to annoy Harry:

    People are very wrong to say corporations don't use PHP. The reality is, there are three corporate camps out there broken down like this;

    1. Those using J2EE etc. - by far the biggest
    2/3. Those using MS .NET etc. in at spot
    2/3. Those using Open Source e.g. Perl / PHP

    Notice I put 2/3 - there's alot of companies using Perl [Link to Jobserve) out there and they tend to be the ones open to stuff like PHP.
    I ran three searches on Jobserve, that you referred to...

    Java OR JSP OR J2EE: 1383
    ASP OR .NET OR VB: 1358
    PHP OR Perl: 354

    Now that I got that out of my system, I'm going to try to summarize.

    SUMMARY
    The majority here seems to agree on the following matters:
    • .NET and Java are both well suited for enterprise development.
    • PHP is well suited for small-scale development
    • PHP can do enterprise development


    What seems to be the disagreement here is that PHP whether PHP is suitable for Enterprise development. What I fail to see here are agruments WHY one should pick PHP over Java or .NET. Even though PHP "can do it", I fail to see the reason to pick it when there are solutions that are so well adapted for it.
    Mattias Johansson
    Short, Swedish, Web Developer

    Buttons and Dog Tags with your custom design:
    FatStatement.com

  21. #96
    Wanna-be Apple nut silver trophy M. Johansson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Halmstad, Sweden
    Posts
    7,400
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    For you people interested in cross-platform .NET...

    http://www.sitepointforums.com/showt...threadid=76735
    Mattias Johansson
    Short, Swedish, Web Developer

    Buttons and Dog Tags with your custom design:
    FatStatement.com

  22. #97
    SitePoint Evangelist
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    592
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The heart of .NET is just as cross platform as PHP is. The fact that things like Windows Forms, etc, rely on Windows really is besides the point. That's not the core of .NET, is it?
    Technically, I agree with you. But what good is a cross-platform language if you can't write a program for one platform and immediately run it on the other? To compare it with Java: the difference with JDK 1.3 and 1.4 is NOT in the language; it's in the class library...

    But again: technically you are right

    Vincent

  23. #98
    morphine for a wooden leg randem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    .chicago.il.us
    Posts
    957
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Originally posted by M. Johansson
    Even though PHP "can do it", I fail to see the reason to pick it when there are solutions that are so well adapted for it.
    At the end of the day, I'm still a strong PHP advocate. Still, I would never claim PHP to be better than either .NET or J2EE. In my mind, a scripting engine still does not compare in any way to an enterprise-targeted platform.

    As much as I respect Harry and his input around here, I think he's just refusing to "let a sleeping dog lie" with this topic, and his opinion represents a large number of PHP/OpenSource advocates. His arguments reflect the philanthropic ideals of the anti-MS community and its willingness to (at times) accept a lesser product in order to completely remove the influence of a perceived evil.

    And in a similar manner, I believe Jeremy - another valued contributor in these forums - is very representative of the NBM corporate crowd... In true Microsoft fashion, he's flip-flopped his position for the single-minded goal of supporting what he believes to be the superior product. However in supporting .NET, he seems to write off the other technologies discussed, not by his words but by their overtones.

    I'm far from the first person to point this out, but I'd like to restate the resounding point: It is very unlikely either of the polar opposites will be swayed by the other's arguments. But this is not all bad...

    This is by far the most popular thread I've witnessed since my membership at SitePoint. In the process of this debate, a number of good links to interesting resources have surfaced, along with a lot of good points supporting all sides in the argument, which has provided me with invaluable knowledge for any future decision-making of my own.

    Has it converted me to a dotnet supporter? No. In fact, I still hate Microsoft as much as ever. But I will honestly say that I can imagine a few scenarios where I might find myself chosing dotnet. Of course I'll most likely choose J2EE first. And for small web projects, you still can't beat PHP.

    I'm sure this will go on, but I'm unsubscribing because it's going too fast for me to keep up! So thanks everyone who has contributed valuable information that I've learned from!
    ----Adopt-a-Sig----
    Your message here!

  24. #99
    SitePoint Wizard gold trophysilver trophy
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    2,479
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Fair point on the jobserve searches although I'd make one further search;

    ASP OR .NET (without VB) 709 Jobs

    Oh and another interesting one;

    J2EE: 433
    .NET: 356

    What seems to be the disagreement here is that PHP whether PHP is suitable for Enterprise development. What I fail to see here are agruments WHY one should pick PHP over Java or .NET. Even though PHP "can do it", I fail to see the reason to pick it when there are solutions that are so well adapted for it.
    The main argument I'd use there is to "future proof" your application. PHP and Perl will run more or less anywhere - they have the best record for being cross platform.

    Java is good but at enterprise level, you'll be to some extent locked in to doing things "all Java".

    .NET will, in my opinion, never run at enterprise level on anything but Windows. Linux is coming on strong but MS hates it. The day may come when companies like Oracle decide they're no longer going to support Windows, by way of example.

    The other big argument is price of purchasing software (I ignore any discussion of development costs for Jeremy's sake). Putting together enterprise Java costs big bucks. Enterprise .NET is probably cheaper but still expensive. PHP/Perl et al: not a penny except for hardware.

    This I'd have to agree with;

    .NET and Java are both well suited for enterprise development.

    PHP is well suited for small-scale development

    PHP can do enterprise development

    Guess that's about it.

  25. #100
    SitePoint Addict
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Posts
    302
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Originally posted by voostind


    Technically, I agree with you. But what good is a cross-platform language if you can't write a program for one platform and immediately run it on the other? To compare it with Java: the difference with JDK 1.3 and 1.4 is NOT in the language; it's in the class library...

    But again: technically you are right

    Vincent
    To be fair Java is not as cross-platform as it claims, many enterprise applications are built for a particular server IBM for example and do not run on other platforms without changes.


Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •