Viktors Rotanovs wrote:
> PHP also runs on Windows and there's nothing wrong with running it that way.
Yeah, but on mission-critical high-end applications, would you run it on
windows? I wouldn't. Though maybe I wouldn't run windows either...
> Isn't the main goal to build working application as quickly as possible?
I guess this one got beaten to death over my lunch hour ;)
Answer: depends on the job. With no budget or time, yes, faster is king.
With a healthy budget and/or enough time, no, the main goal is to do it
right. Priorities shift with time.
>>Also, ASP.NET 2.0's goals are to cut coding down by 70%, which may get
>>it closer to CF's level.
>
> There are lots of modules available for PHP for doing common tasks, all
> of them are available on pear.php.net, plus you can borrow LOTS of code
> from various free apps available on the net.
Good point, but there are 'modules' (term loosely) out there for any
language. Typically, I don't use any add-ons on high-traffic areas
unless they're VERY polished or way out of my development ballpark. I
like to know exactly what's happening under my hood (though I have heard
good things about Pear).
>>Also, we have settled (for good) on SQL Server, therefore ADO.NET would
>>be ideal for connecting to it.
>
> PHP also works with SQL Server, even with stored procedures etc.
So does CF, but it's still not ADO.NET.
> You can run PHP on Linux or any other OS when you grow and don't like to
> buy more Windows licenses.
:) that day may come.
>>Yes, I know the development costs are an issue as well, but there are
>>some other issues in play that i'm not going to talk about in this email.
>
> Perhaps company politics?
Yes, and JRun server issues, and the MS .NET marketing campaign.
-nathan strutz
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
