SitePoint Sponsor

User Tag List

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 92
  1. #51
    Prolific Blogger silver trophy Technosailor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Before These Crowded Streets
    Posts
    9,446
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    who's quelching debate? Surely not me. I just don't think tempers need to flare.
    Aaron Brazell
    Technosailor



  2. #52
    SitePoint Wizard silver trophy Jeremy W.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    9,121
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Are people getting tempered? I'm getting a bit sick of repeating the "why are you yelling at me, I'm just repeating what Yahoo said" line, but I'm not upset
    SVP Marketing, SoCast SRM
    Personal blog: Strategerize
    Twitter: @jeremywright

  3. #53
    Mlle. Ledoyen silver trophy seanf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    7,168
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Originally posted by siteguru
    I thought I saw them mention mySQL in the presentation?
    Originally posted by M. Johansson
    And why in the nine hells they are using mySQL is beyond me
    Originally posted by Gryff
    Secondly i didnt see them mention mysql, i thought postgres would have been a better choice
    Originally posted by Sketch
    Mattias, yeah. MySQL does seem like a stupid idea for a databse backend
    How well did you people actually read this thing before laying down the what is what in this thread?

    "replacing some DBM and Oracle with MySQL" - MySQL is only used for certain areas of the site. The only one I know for sure is the stock listings. MySQL is the obvious choice here because of speed. MySQL is not going to be backing the whole site

    Sean
    Harry Potter

    -- You lived inside my world so softly
    -- Protected only by the kindness of your nature

  4. #54
    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)
    Originally posted by seanf
    "replacing some DBM and Oracle with MySQL" - MySQL is only used for certain areas of the site. The only one I know for sure is the stock listings. MySQL is the obvious choice here because of speed. MySQL is not going to be backing the whole site
    I know. It's just that flat HTML would make much more sense.
    Mattias Johansson
    Short, Swedish, Web Developer

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

  5. #55
    Hi there! Owen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    CA
    Posts
    1,165
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Not when you have a site as large as Yahoo finance. All the data needs to be updated at least every 5 minutes. The sheer number of different views (4 or 5), graphs (about 9), and data pages (5 or 6), for EACH and EVERY stock (tens of thousands). This makes it impractical to generate static HTML. That's where a quick and dirty DB like mySQL is great--there are no complicated relations to much it up--just a huge amount of data.

    Of course, we're getting off track here.

    Owen

  6. #56
    Super Ninja Monkey Travis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Sioux City, Iowa
    Posts
    691
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Yeah mySQL's only real strength over other solutions like Oracle is its fast SELECTs. For a site like Y! most of the queries are going to be to select some info from the database to be displayed to the user (like the stock info).
    Travis Watkins - Hyperactive Coder
    My Blog: Realist Anew
    Projects: Alacarte - Gnome Menu Editor

  7. #57
    ********* wombat firepages's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Perth Australia
    Posts
    1,717
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    "I'm not excited. Not once have I bashed PHP or Yahoo's decision."
    reread your first post.

    "I think it's funny considering that Yahoo themselves said they have lost "hundreds of millions of dollars" "
    therefore its ok to continue throwing away money
    "we will save the companies I work for more money then they will spend on us. In fact, we will save them 2-3 times what they spent on us this year"
    how many of your clients have 1000's of CPU's to consider?
    "I'll say it again, as it appears I've had to over and over: PHP is a great language. "
    no you havent, at least not in this thread (until now)
    "It is obvious that they will commit to this "for a time", but it should also be obvious that, as in any corp, over time the amount they are willing to "take it on the chin" will slowly decrease and they will switch technologies."
    Since the above is possibly true (with a crystal ball) for most technologies, Is there a point there ? because I for the life of me can't see one.
    "or whatever PHP is "capable" of doing various things. I'm not arguing any of that. "
    yes you are, you backup the authors note twice about seperation of logic/design , you appear to not realise that this is possible with PHP, & since you do not I find it hard to see how you can make any further comments on PHP's capabilities and hold any weight.

    Why am I harping on ? well you constantly interject in pro-PHP discussions to add your 'Its crap but.. I never said it' type comments , if I were posting in the .NET forums doing the same thing then I would expect a bit of resistance too, I think thats quite obvious.

  8. #58
    SitePoint Wizard silver trophy Jeremy W.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    9,121
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    How many times do I need to clarify on this *L*

    I feel like a school teacher. My first post had nothing to do with PHP being bad. Read my first post again, I truly suggest you do. I wasn't summarizing their decision, as I've already said 3 times. I was summarizing the presentation: They had messed up in the past.

    I have never once said PHP was a bad decision, that Yahoo made a bad decision, that PHP wasn't capable, etc.

    "therefore its ok to continue throwing away money"

    How is it throwing money away if it saves the money of many companies, including Fortune 500 ones? I think it's you making the assumptions, not me.

    "how many of your clients have 1000's of CPU's to consider?"

    200. Scale is scale is scale. If it saves 10% at 200 servers, why would it saves less (when you average development costs and initial startup costs across servers) on 4500 or even 20,000? Makes no sense what you are saying.

    "no you havent, at least not in this thread (until now)"

    Actually I have. I've said at least 3 times that I think Yahoo's choice was fine and that there was nothing wrong with it. I'd love to see you quote a position which stated I thought PHP sucked or Yahoo was wrong using PHP.

    "Since the above is possibly true (with a crystal ball) for most technologies, Is there a point there ? because I for the life of me can't see one."

    Erm. They've said they aren't happy. Whenever they aren't happy they change. This has nothing to do with individual technologies, and everything to do with how PHP fits their needs, and it doesn't, as has already been shown by multiple posters.

    "yes you are, you backup the authors note twice about seperation of logic/design , you appear to not realise that this is possible with PHP"

    I backup the authors. When I don't I'm dismissing Yahoo as being idiots. When I do I'm being an idiot. Where is the line with you mate? One minute you're telling me disagreeing with Yahoo is paramount to debating physics with Einstein, and the next you're disagreeing with Yahoo. You can't be on both sides of the fence.

    "Why am I harping on ? well you constantly interject in pro-PHP discussions to add your 'Its crap but.. I never said it' type comments , if I were posting in the .NET forums doing the same thing then I would expect a bit of resistance too, I think thats quite obvious."

    I'll interject wherever I see fit where there are misunderstandings, etc. Feel free to come into the .NET area and do the same. In fact, you did, and were proven wrong a dozen times and have retreated from several discussions. I'm sitting here without titles like "Why .NET sucks", just talking about how good PHP is, how I use it all the time, and how it's the best decision, in my opinion, at this time for Yahoo (besides doing a proprietary language). What more could I possibly say?

    I'm sure you'd love for me to say "sorry, I was wrong", but since I'm defending Yahoo, defending PHP, and defending the choice they made. So, if I apologized and said I was wrong, I woudl once again be "that idiot MS guy who never listens"... Even though it's you who isn't listening to a word I've said.

    J
    SVP Marketing, SoCast SRM
    Personal blog: Strategerize
    Twitter: @jeremywright

  9. #59
    SitePoint Wizard gold trophysilver trophy
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    2,479
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Good evening

    I have to agree with Jeremy in principle because of a couple of things.

    First I'm wondering, as has all ready been mentioned, whether they've done their research properly - Smarty is bad sign IMO.

    Secondly, PHP is a risky choice. Up front the fact that it can be set up for free must be a big pull for a .com these days and PHP coders come cheaper than ASP JSP. So the initial outlay is low. But no ones done a PHP project of this size, so the potential to get it wrong is big.

    Overall though, I guess they have no choice. Microsoft can't offer server software for this scale of operation - only Linux (or perhaps Solaris - much slower than Linux) with stuff like clustering etc. is gonna cut it, plus Apache of course. Java (even for free with JBoss) is going to mean hardware upgrades, being a dog.

    But despite doubts, it great news for PHP. I'm sure Yahoo are gonna get alot of support from everyone, should they need it. It's surely gonna raise PHP's profile. And who knows - with this kind of attention, may be some other companies will put together serious tools for PHP?

    Personally I think they're going to succeed.

  10. #60
    SitePoint Wizard silver trophy Jeremy W.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    9,121
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Thank God...

    Here was me expecting another attack on me for stuff I hadn't said...

    Thanks mate,

    J
    SVP Marketing, SoCast SRM
    Personal blog: Strategerize
    Twitter: @jeremywright

  11. #61
    ********* wombat firepages's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Perth Australia
    Posts
    1,717
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Originally posted by Jeremy W.
    Basically the point is they messed up. Their internal projects have always been done "ad hoc" and off the cuff, and YScript, etc are just examples of that. If they had simply produced the requirements documents in the presentation before working on the scripting languages, they wouldn't need to redo everything.
    ..... ...
    They really need to get their act together and pick something that actually does satisfy all of their operational requirements. PHP doesn't.
    well thank gawd you aint attacking them.

    thats defending Yahoo & PHP ?...,("how I use it all the time, and how it's the best decision, in my opinion, at this time for Yahoo")

    "You can't be on both sides of the fence"
    I am not, I think my position is very clear , yours appears (to my eyes) to have changed or at least be multi-faceted/dimensional

    "Feel free to come into the .NET area and do the same. In fact, you did, and were proven wrong a dozen times and have retreated from several discussions"

    I have ventured directly into the .NET forums once only , and been proven wrong ? I dont know, thats subjective , retreated from several discussions ??? not a chance I am far too stubborn.

  12. #62
    ********* wombat firepages's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Perth Australia
    Posts
    1,717
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    "But no ones done a PHP project of this size .... PHP is a risky choice. "

    HarryF no-one has done a project of this size fullstop let alone in PHP, apart from Yahoo of course, who perhaps may have an inkling of the problems associated with such.

    As for Smarty , I too am a little confuddled that that was even mentioned, perhaps 'ala smarty' was meant , perhaps the fact that it was questionmarked is just a case of mentioning an existing templating system? , one assumes that templating is something they could come up with on thier own.

    "...days and PHP coders come cheaper than ASP JAVA"

    I doubt that thats a consideration, they already have the staff, how long does it take a C++ head to get around PHP? or perhaps more to the point to extend it etc.

  13. #63
    SitePoint Wizard gold trophysilver trophy
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    2,479
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    OK, rational responses over.



    WHOOP WHOOP!
    PHP RULES!



    Methinks 5 years down the road from now there'll be people complaining about PHP's monopoly

  14. #64
    SitePoint Wizard silver trophy Jeremy W.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    9,121
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Firepages, this is now, by my count, the FIFTH time I've said this:

    My original response was a wrapup of Yahoo's past. Not their decision. It was never about their decision to use PHP.

    I'm trying to keep the post short, because perhaps the point got lost last time.

    As far as PHP not satisfying their operational requirements, it doesn't. Quite simply, that's all there is to it, unless you are arguing with Yahoo, which you earlier told me I was an idiot for doing (when I wasn't, I've in fact been agreeing with them all along).

    Dunno what else to say, except to encourage you to read what I've actually written instead of what you think I've written.

    Again, just so it doesn't get lost:

    My first post was an encapsulation of Yahoo's history of development, not their choice of PHP or any other technology.
    SVP Marketing, SoCast SRM
    Personal blog: Strategerize
    Twitter: @jeremywright

  15. #65
    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, Firepages... knock it off. I'll remove any further bickering over what Jeremy said in earlier posts. It doesn't serve this discussion.
    Mattias Johansson
    Short, Swedish, Web Developer

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

  16. #66
    ********* wombat firepages's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Perth Australia
    Posts
    1,717
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    thats a bit targeted innit ?

  17. #67
    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)
    Originally posted by HarryF
    First I'm wondering, as has all ready been mentioned, whether they've done their research properly - Smarty is bad sign IMO.
    Yeah. Whether it is Smarty itself or "a la Smarty" doesn't really matter - it's bad nonetheless, in my opinion.

    Secondly, PHP is a risky choice. Up front the fact that it can be set up for free must be a big pull for a .com these days and PHP coders come cheaper than ASP JSP. So the initial outlay is low. But no ones done a PHP project of this size, so the potential to get it wrong is big.
    Indeed it is! PHP wasn't designed for projects this big, as is evident by it's non-forced OO, lack of member protection etc, and there are few people with experience of really large PHP projects. With that said, PHP can most certainly handle it with a competent and strong leadership.

    Overall though, I guess they have no choice. Microsoft can't offer server software for this scale of operation - only Linux (or perhaps Solaris - much slower than Linux) with stuff like clustering etc. is gonna cut it, plus Apache of course. Java (even for free with JBoss) is going to mean hardware upgrades, being a dog.
    They are stuck with FreeBSD, not linux, I believe. Chances are pretty high that they would have went with Java if they ran Linux. Of course, there is the matter of hardware upgrades, of course - I wouldn't know about Y:s current hardware config.

    But despite doubts, it great news for PHP. I'm sure Yahoo are gonna get alot of support from everyone, should they need it. It's surely gonna raise PHP's profile. And who knows - with this kind of attention, may be some other companies will put together serious tools for PHP?

    Personally I think they're going to succeed.
    Indeed it is, and it will be great material for a case study. I also think they will succeed - the question is - "How well?"
    Mattias Johansson
    Short, Swedish, Web Developer

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

  18. #68
    SitePoint Addict richard_h's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    London
    Posts
    301
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I find it quite hard to believe there’s any talk of negativity in a PHP forum on such an occasion. Everyone that thinks Yahoo have made the wrong decision in choosing PHP, I suggest they come back and laugh when and if it all goes wrong.

    Until then I think it would be a lot more productive talking about the positive side of Yahoo’s decision in choosing PHP.

  19. #69
    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)
    Originally posted by richard_h
    I find it quite hard to believe there’s any talk of negativity in a PHP forum on such an occasion. Everyone that thinks Yahoo have made the wrong decision in choosing PHP, I suggest they come back and laugh when and if it all goes wrong.

    Until then I think it would be a lot more productive talking about the positive side of Yahoo’s decision in choosing PHP.
    Eh - what? So just because this is the PHP forum, we are not allowed to look at PHP issues from other viewpoints than the positive one?
    Mattias Johansson
    Short, Swedish, Web Developer

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

  20. #70
    SitePoint Evangelist
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    466
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    hehe - would be a pretty boring discussion if people weren't targeting the bad points as well as the good.

    Yahoo! switching to PHP
    Reply 1: w00t
    Reply 2: hooray.
    Reply 3: yippee.
    etc

    I think the main point of interest in Yahoo!s decision is the effects it will have on open-sourced languages and the community in general. Certainly (after enough time has passed to properly show whether the move to PHP has been successful) it should help persuade other big hitters in the industry to follow suit. [assuming of course that success is gained, as, for sure, it is not guaranteed]

    It should also be interesting to see exactly which associated technologies are either created or improved upon as a direct result of Yahoo!s usage. I wonder exactly how open-sourced Yahoo! are going to be with anything new that they come up with.
    teckis - that's news to me.

  21. #71
    ********* wombat firepages's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Perth Australia
    Posts
    1,717
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Originally posted by richard_h
    I find it quite hard to believe there’s any talk of negativity in a PHP forum on such an occasion. Everyone that thinks Yahoo have made the wrong decision in choosing PHP, I suggest they come back and laugh when and if it all goes wrong.

    Until then I think it would be a lot more productive talking about the positive side of Yahoo’s decision in choosing PHP.
    hear hear richard_h !

    the benefits to PHP are enourmous even if only by association if all goes well, a big problem for so long has been the lack of higher profile sites utilising PHP and has so often been a stick to poke PHP heads with in discussions around the boards and boardrooms of the world. (There are of course some very large organisations that utilise PHP in a variety of ways (Deutche-Bank,Lufthansa,Barclays-bank,blah (yahoo have in part already)) but they don't get any bigger than Yahoo)

    One also assumes that if this is indeed the way Yahoo go, that some of the code and practices that Yahoo utilise/create adapt will filter out to the rest of the community in one way or another, perhaps they will even contribute to the source or knock out a couple of killer extensions ? who knows.

    All in all unless they get it all terribly wrong this can only be good for PHP and people who earn a living out of PHP (eg: me).

    Why such negativity ? perhaps because it would be a kick in the teeth to those who have told us that PHP is a mere scripting language and incapable of much more than the average homepage or medium sized commercial site? and can not see further than the crutches of existing libraries and wizards ? dunno ?

    disclaimer: I did not mention Enterprise once.

  22. #72
    ********* wombat firepages's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Perth Australia
    Posts
    1,717
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    sorry oki-san - didnt see you there and I was not cribbing honest !

  23. #73
    SitePoint Addict richard_h's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    London
    Posts
    301
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Eh - what? So just because this is the PHP forum, we are not allowed to look at PHP issues from other viewpoints than the positive one?
    It just seems to me that this thread is dominated with all the reasons PHP is the wrong chose. I just find this quite strange in a PHP forum.

    My point was that all the reasons PHP shouldn’t be used in my opinion have been exhausted and it would make a refreshing change to discuss some of the positive side effects Yahoo’s decision will have.

  24. #74
    SitePoint Wizard gold trophysilver trophy
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    2,479
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The bottom line, aside from any if's and but's is PHP is still doing what everyone says it shouldn't - beating the odds.

    How is it a piece of Open Source software developed by a few regulars and a large crowd of ad hoc members manages to be the number 1 language for the web?

    PHP does have limitations but the the PHP group is well aware of them, and with each new release, the arguments against evapourate.

    The more I see of this language, the more I think, within a few years, people will be hailing it as one of the best programming languages ever. If you really think about PHP, what it offers is the best of about 3 highly successful languages;

    The power of C++ without the complex code
    The ability to write OO code on a par with Java while remaining fast and flexible - being able to prototype an application real fast for example
    The ease of use of Perl, without the Latin syntax

    It's only real weakness is a lack of "central" library. But recently I've been taking a closer look at PEAR. PEAR is finally going to be officially released, with PHP 4.3.0, as part of the standard distribution, with full documentation etc. Some may argue with the way it's coded, but in terms of what it delivers, I think we'll see, somewhere in PHP 5, that PEARs looking like a contender vs the Java and MS libraries.

    The lack of library is where the real risk in for Yahoo. If they get that part right, Mattias's question "But how well?" will be answered "Like no one would have imagined". And Yahoo have the ability to pull it off, having already written their own server side language.

    And looking at where Yahoo stands, I actually think they took the only had one choice anyway.

  25. #75
    Mlle. Ledoyen silver trophy seanf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    7,168
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Originally posted by pootergeist
    I wonder exactly how open-sourced Yahoo! are going to be with anything new that they come up with
    Of course it's very unlikely that the apps will ever be released, but if the Yahoo! developers keep putting quality tools and articles out (like http://jeremy.zawodny.com/mysql/ and http://www.mysql.com/portal/software...mments-36.html) then does that really matter? There are ways to progress the Open Source community without giving away your source

    Sean
    Harry Potter

    -- You lived inside my world so softly
    -- Protected only by the kindness of your nature


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
  •