Re: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
On Wed, August 24, 2005 7:32 am, Rick Emery wrote: > Quoting Richard Lynch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >> Just for a test case, write a 10-line ASP script that does something >> similar, if much simpler, and pound on it on the same box with the >> Padcom clients. > > I did that when the problem first appeared. Great minds think alike > :-) > >> I'm betting you'll have the SAME ISSUE, and that the problem has >> NOTHING to do with PHP whatsoever. > > And you'd win that bet. I thought that would be the proof I'd need to > show that it wasn't PHP, but management has some notion that PHP might > have somehow tainted IIS. Install it on a different box, which has IIS/ASP, and *NO* PHP was ever installed. It can be any old box out of the closet, that you wipe and install Windows, IIS, ASP and NOTHING else. Same bug? Then it CANNOT be a PHP bug, can it? Even PHB from Dilbert should understand that one... Though, honestly, it sounds like they just aren't going to listen to facts -- not even the ones about how much this is costing them. I may not be making ends meet, but I sure am happy not to have to put up with this kind of crap any more :-v -- Like Music? http://l-i-e.com/artists.htm -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
It's too bad you have to use Windows and IIS. Just curious but why are they not wanting to use Linux? Do they know it's free and way less likely to be attacked? I've made this argument numerous times. Management seemed to be receptive, and I thought they were starting to change their "Microsoft only" attitudes, so the statement from my boss that management said it "has to run on IIS" really caught me by surprise. I think you might be going about this the wrong way... If I understand this thread correctly, your app *works* on linux/php. It breaks on windows/php. So it's working, right? Which is all they should care about, but they don't? So, write up a little document showing how much time (which equals money) you're spending trying to fix something that really isn't broken except in the eye's of management. This thread's been going on for a couple of days now. Assuming you've done nothing else for those several days and I've seen mention of discussing it with other engineers and sysadmins... just how much money has the company spent on this non-problem? Then since it also seems like you're not that much closer to solving the problem, estimate how much additional time it's going to take to fix it. Then show them the bottom line. That the company has "spent" $2,000 so far and will probably spend another $3,000 until it's fixed. Not to mention all your other projects being delayed. That's another $5,000. Ask them if this is worth spending $10,000 to fix something which isn't broken. Then be sure to tell them you will be happy to revisit the problem when there is *nothing else to do* I've had issues like this.. usually they want to know how long it will take to port our application from FreeBSD/PHP/PostgreSQL to Windows/ASP/SQLServer and when I tell them at least six months, probably a year, they decide maybe it's not worth it to satisfy someones need to say "yes, we run on windows!" (and yes, I know php,postgresql is available for windows now, but that's not the point) Anyway, might work... then again it might not. But it changes it from a technical discussion to a financial one which is how they think. good luck! -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
I've tried to tell the that there are Fortune 500 companies running PHP on Windows and IIS (there are, right?). Target, Tickmaster, Yahoo, Amazon, and the list goes on and on. Not too sure about this: http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph?site=amazon.com http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph?site=ticketmaster.com etc PHP, possibly, but not on IIS and Windows. I remember at OSCON a couple years ago they said that amazon and ticketmaster where using PHP. They might just hide it well or they might be using it for smaller applications within the company. -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
> >> I'm betting you'll have the SAME ISSUE, and that the problem has > >> NOTHING to do with PHP whatsoever. > > > > And you'd win that bet. I thought that would be the proof I'd need to > > show that it wasn't PHP, but management has some notion that PHP might > > have somehow tainted IIS. > > Gotta love a management group that doesn't listen to their IT guys and > think they know the answer to all the IT problems even though they have > no clue about IT. I've been there done that and guess what? I'm still > doing it to this day. I think it's one of those never ending things. > What you should do is configure IIS to parse PHP with .asp extensions > and just tell them that it's ASP. Now that would be funny! > > >> PHP works fine with IIS and Windows. > > > > I've tried to tell the that there are Fortune 500 companies running > > PHP on Windows and IIS (there are, right?). > > Target, Tickmaster, Yahoo, Amazon, and the list goes on and on. Not too sure about this: http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph?site=amazon.com http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph?site=ticketmaster.com etc PHP, possibly, but not on IIS and Windows. > > > Or you could leave IIS on the Windows machine and install Apache on the > same Windows box and run PHP using Apache on Windows and see if that > solves your problem. Then of course don't tell management that you are > running Apache! ;-) Class idea! I think you should do this! Good luck -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
I'm betting you'll have the SAME ISSUE, and that the problem has NOTHING to do with PHP whatsoever. And you'd win that bet. I thought that would be the proof I'd need to show that it wasn't PHP, but management has some notion that PHP might have somehow tainted IIS. Gotta love a management group that doesn't listen to their IT guys and think they know the answer to all the IT problems even though they have no clue about IT. I've been there done that and guess what? I'm still doing it to this day. I think it's one of those never ending things. What you should do is configure IIS to parse PHP with .asp extensions and just tell them that it's ASP. Now that would be funny! PHP works fine with IIS and Windows. I've tried to tell the that there are Fortune 500 companies running PHP on Windows and IIS (there are, right?). Target, Tickmaster, Yahoo, Amazon, and the list goes on and on. I'll say it again: There is *NOTHING* wrong with PHP and IIS. I agree. Unfortunately, I have to prove that to them before they'll look elsewhere for the problem. Ugh. Sounds like to me you are getting to the point where you just need to slap them! ;-) In fact, you could probably get ahold of a Padcom and prove it to yourself in a days' work, and then get them to agree that if it's not PHP nor your script that's broken, but Windows+IIS, then maybe they should just leave the WORKING stuff alone. Probably won't work. But that's how office politics work. Exactly what I'm finding out. Or you could leave IIS on the Windows machine and install Apache on the same Windows box and run PHP using Apache on Windows and see if that solves your problem. Then of course don't tell management that you are running Apache! ;-) On a serious note something that might change their mind (this is what I did). Go do some research about real stories of companies dealing with Windows+IIS and the hard ships they have encountered and why they switched to something else. I'm sure getting stats on how many more times you are likely to get hack attempts with a Windows+IIS vs. an Linux+Apache is out there some where. I'm sure that's a pretty startling surprise. If management cares at all about security and the up time of their applications etc then they won't be able to ignore facts that have already happened. Then again I've pointed out security flaws in code and server setup at a company I work for in which their computer security, if broken into, could cost the business to go under and what have they done? Nothing. When did I point this out to them? 8 months ago. Do I continue to bug them and show them what kind of damage I can do to their organization? Yep. Do they know because of this they could lose millions of dollars and lose high profile contracts? Yep. Do they listen and do anything about it? Nope. *shrug* There's only so much you can do with people who have a one track mind and refuse to see what you are showing them. Anyway, sorry for the tangent! Good luck convincing management! -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
Quoting Richard Lynch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Just for a test case, write a 10-line ASP script that does something similar, if much simpler, and pound on it on the same box with the Padcom clients. I did that when the problem first appeared. Great minds think alike :-) I'm betting you'll have the SAME ISSUE, and that the problem has NOTHING to do with PHP whatsoever. And you'd win that bet. I thought that would be the proof I'd need to show that it wasn't PHP, but management has some notion that PHP might have somehow tainted IIS. PHP works fine with IIS and Windows. I've tried to tell the that there are Fortune 500 companies running PHP on Windows and IIS (there are, right?). Or, rather, PHP doesn't make IIS and Windows any LESS stable than they already were without PHP. :-) I'll say it again: There is *NOTHING* wrong with PHP and IIS. I agree. Unfortunately, I have to prove that to them before they'll look elsewhere for the problem. Ugh. IIS and Windows are badly-broken, all on their own, without PHP. :-) In fact, you could probably get ahold of a Padcom and prove it to yourself in a days' work, and then get them to agree that if it's not PHP nor your script that's broken, but Windows+IIS, then maybe they should just leave the WORKING stuff alone. Probably won't work. But that's how office politics work. Exactly what I'm finding out. Thanks, Rick -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
RE: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
Quoting Nathan Tobik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Have you tried PHP 4.x? Give that a shot and see what effects that has on the application. We have used PHP with IIS and SQL Server like you said, I can say from experience that PHP 5 had the same problems as the initial poster described. The pages would time out and hang randomly. I put a 4.x version of PHP on the machine and it's been working ever since. That will probably be our next step (once I rewrite the XML portions of the application). It's encouraging that it fixed your problem. Also if you plan on using PHP with SQL Server and Linux we have been using 5 with no problems for over a year now. It gets pretty heavy use daily. I just checked the uptime of the linux machine that's currently hosting the production app (which is an old desktop machine we had sitting around gathering dust; a Pentium III 800 w/256MB RAM, and is handling the load perfectly); 54+ days of 24/7 operations, and still going strong. The only gripe I have is FreeTDS only allows one connection at a time, I'd love to use a JDBC driver with PHP. We're looking at using PHP and Hibernate which would let us use JDBC.. Best of luck. I managed this with PEAR's Cache_Lite package. When the first client requests the data, the server app hits the database once and stores the data in a cache. Every subsequent request gets its data from the cache, until it expires 30 seconds later. Then the pattern repeats. So only one DB connection works fine for us. Thanks, Rick -- Rick Emery "When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the Earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there you will always long to return" -- Leonardo Da Vinci -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
RE: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
Quoting Jim Moseby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Can they access other (non-php) pages on that server during one of these failures? No. I wrote an ASP page that displays the same data with the same refresh rate. When the PHP app fails, the ASP page is also inaccessible. I thought this proved it wasn't a PHP problem, but management was unconvinced that PHP didn't somehow taint IIS and cause the problem. Can they PING the server? Yes, which (in my mind) points to an IIS issue. I don't have the proper knowledge of Windows or IIS to troubleshoot it, but one of my co-workers has a theory about Windows and its dynamic routing tables. Have your network people had a look at a packet capture from the network during one of the failures? If they did, they would see what was happening. I've discussed this with the network administator. That's going to be one of our troubleshooting steps going forward. The fact that you say it is ONLY the padcom clients is enlightening because it means this is not a server failure, but a failure somewhere in between or at the client itself. In any case, I don't think your boss's requirement that whatever language is chosen must run on IIS (ack!) is violated, because PHP runs quite nicely on thousands (I'm sure) of IIS servers. Agreed. JM "Windows: 32-bit extensions and a graphic shell for a 16-bit patch to an 8-bit OS originally coded for a 4-bit CPU, written by a 2-bit company that can't stand 1-bit of competition." My co-workers and I had a good laugh over this signature :-) Thanks, Rick -- Rick Emery "When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the Earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there you will always long to return" -- Leonardo Da Vinci -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
Quoting Miles Thompson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Rick, Deepest sympathy. So you have a solution which works, for everyone, but doctrine dictates differently. I'd suspect VPN / IIS interaction. If I was your manager, I'd take comfort from the FACT that you were able to switch everything over to Linux and it ran w/o difficulty. Cripes, if you had this problem with ColdFusion you'd be sitting there, a lonely soul, amongst the finger-pointers, and nothing would be running. You took the words right out of my mouth, and said it so eloquently that I nearly forwarded it to management as echoing my feelings and frustration. Unfortunately (or fortunately, I guess) I didn't have the guts to do it; I'd be risking getting in trouble (they've been know to reprimand people because of the "tone" in an email). Thanks, Rick -- Rick Emery "When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the Earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there you will always long to return" -- Leonardo Da Vinci -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
Quoting Jay Paulson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Have you tried PHP 4.x? Give that a shot and see what effects that has on the application. I've recommended that as a troubleshooting step, and it's a great idea. If it ends up working out, I'll almost be bummed because I like some of the new features in PHP 5. The app won't require too many changes, except that it relies pretty heavily on XML, and SimpleXML made things really easy. I've never done XML processing with PHP 4, but from a brief glance at the manual, it doesn't look very simple. Still, it's worth a shot. You might want to post the code for your application on the list so we all can see it (remember to remove usernames, passwords, and ip #'s). There are some really smart and innovative people on this list, and the thought had crossed my mind. But the code is pretty lengthy, and frankly I'd be embarassed to have anybody look at it :-) It's too bad you have to use Windows and IIS. Just curious but why are they not wanting to use Linux? Do they know it's free and way less likely to be attacked? I've made this argument numerous times. Management seemed to be receptive, and I thought they were starting to change their "Microsoft only" attitudes, so the statement from my boss that management said it "has to run on IIS" really caught me by surprise. Thanks, Rick -- Rick Emery "When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the Earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there you will always long to return" -- Leonardo Da Vinci -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
Just a quick note to thank everybody who has replied. I've been getting a lot of feedback, and won't be able to reply to all of the messages I've received, but I appreciate each and every one of them and don't want anybody to feel left out. Thanks again, Rick -- Rick Emery "When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the Earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there you will always long to return" -- Leonardo Da Vinci -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
On Tue, August 23, 2005 9:44 am, Rick Emery wrote: > Quoting Rick Emery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >> Ugh, we're *never* going to make a decision. My boss just sent me >> this email: > > I wrote an application, using PHP5, that displays a list and refreshes > every 30 seconds (the data is constantly changing, but a 30 second > delay is acceptable). As I've indicated previously, we're a Microsoft > shop, so the data comes from MS SQL Server 2000. No problems, the app > worked great using my workstation as the server with a few clients > running the app from it. It even worked when we moved it to a server > and opened it up to everyone on our intranet (for a while). > > We have two different types of clients. Some use desktop computers, > physically connected to our network, while others use mobile laptops > connected to our network via cellular (using Sprint AirCards) using > third-party VPN software (Padcom, in case anyone's familiar). > > We set the application up on a Windows 2000 Server with IIS (5, I > think), and it would work fine for about a day. Then Padcom clients > kept stopping. They'd request the page and, after a loong time, > display a message that the request timed out. This would seemingly > happen for all Padcom-connected clients at the same time, though the > desktops continued to work fine. We restarted the server running the > Padcom software with no effect. We restarted IIS on the web server > with > no effect. The only thing (seemingly) that cleared the issue was > rebooting the server running IIS. Just for a test case, write a 10-line ASP script that does something similar, if much simpler, and pound on it on the same box with the Padcom clients. I'm betting you'll have the SAME ISSUE, and that the problem has NOTHING to do with PHP whatsoever. PHP works fine with IIS and Windows. Or, rather, PHP doesn't make IIS and Windows any LESS stable than they already were without PHP. > has mentioned changing anything, until this morning. My manager > informed me in our meeting that no language could be chosen unless it > works under IIS. I'll say it again: There is *NOTHING* wrong with PHP and IIS. IIS and Windows are badly-broken, all on their own, without PHP. > So, I'm faced with finding an obscur problem, running on obscur > software (the vendor for Padcom, of course, insists that they've never > seen this problem). I'm confident that the problem has *nothing* to do > with PHP, but am forced by management to try to prove it. If you can prove it, showing the same problem in ASP, then what? Are they going to let you move the application back to a real server? In fact, you could probably get ahold of a Padcom and prove it to yourself in a days' work, and then get them to agree that if it's not PHP nor your script that's broken, but Windows+IIS, then maybe they should just leave the WORKING stuff alone. Probably won't work. But that's how office politics work. -- Like Music? http://l-i-e.com/artists.htm -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
RE: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
> We set the application up on a Windows 2000 Server with IIS (5, I > think), and it would work fine for about a day. Then Padcom clients > kept stopping. They'd request the page and, after a loong time, > display a message that the request timed out. Can they access other (non-php) pages on that server during one of these failures? Can they PING the server? I would bet a days pay ($5.25 - just got a raise!) that they can't. And if I'm right, this eliminates PHP as the cause and starts to smell more of a firewall/routing/DNS/VPN type problem. Have your network people had a look at a packet capture from the network during one of the failures? If they did, they would see what was happening. The fact that you say it is ONLY the padcom clients is enlightening because it means this is not a server failure, but a failure somewhere in between or at the client itself. In any case, I don't think your boss's requirement that whatever language is chosen must run on IIS (ack!) is violated, because PHP runs quite nicely on thousands (I'm sure) of IIS servers. JM "Windows: 32-bit extensions and a graphic shell for a 16-bit patch to an 8-bit OS originally coded for a 4-bit CPU, written by a 2-bit company that can't stand 1-bit of competition." -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
RE: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
Have you tried PHP 4.x? Give that a shot and see what effects that has on the application. We have used PHP with IIS and SQL Server like you said, I can say from experience that PHP 5 had the same problems as the initial poster described. The pages would time out and hang randomly. I put a 4.x version of PHP on the machine and it's been working ever since. Also if you plan on using PHP with SQL Server and Linux we have been using 5 with no problems for over a year now. It gets pretty heavy use daily. The only gripe I have is FreeTDS only allows one connection at a time, I'd love to use a JDBC driver with PHP. We're looking at using PHP and Hibernate which would let us use JDBC.. Best of luck. -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
At 01:44 PM 8/23/2005, Rick Emery wrote: Quoting Rick Emery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Ugh, we're *never* going to make a decision. My boss just sent me this email: A *huge* "THANK YOU!" to everybody who replied; it was extremely helpful and, after my meeting with my manager this morning, she seemed to accept that the article was dated and had inaccurate information. Unfortunately, I may be fighting an uphill battle. I'll give background for those who seemed interested in our progress, but it's pretty long, so feel free to delete this and move on to your regularly scheduled messages (though I'm secretly hoping that someone will have helpful information or suggestions). I wrote an application, using PHP5, that displays a list and refreshes every 30 seconds (the data is constantly changing, but a 30 second delay is acceptable). As I've indicated previously, we're a Microsoft shop, so the data comes from MS SQL Server 2000. No problems, the app worked great using my workstation as the server with a few clients running the app from it. It even worked when we moved it to a server and opened it up to everyone on our intranet (for a while). We have two different types of clients. Some use desktop computers, physically connected to our network, while others use mobile laptops connected to our network via cellular (using Sprint AirCards) using third-party VPN software (Padcom, in case anyone's familiar). We set the application up on a Windows 2000 Server with IIS (5, I think), and it would work fine for about a day. Then Padcom clients kept stopping. They'd request the page and, after a loong time, display a message that the request timed out. This would seemingly happen for all Padcom-connected clients at the same time, though the desktops continued to work fine. We restarted the server running the Padcom software with no effect. We restarted IIS on the web server with no effect. The only thing (seemingly) that cleared the issue was rebooting the server running IIS. I spent a day and a half looking at the issue with the network and server administrators, but nobody could find where the problem was. So, we moved it to a Windows 2003 Server with IIS 6; same problem. On my own, I set up a linux server with apache and placed the application there. They changed the DNS record to point to the linux server, and it has run flawlessly ever since (53 days, 22 hours, 11 minutes). Nobody has mentioned changing anything, until this morning. My manager informed me in our meeting that no language could be chosen unless it works under IIS. So, I'm faced with finding an obscur problem, running on obscur software (the vendor for Padcom, of course, insists that they've never seen this problem). I'm confident that the problem has *nothing* to do with PHP, but am forced by management to try to prove it. That's it in a nutshell. Thanks again to everybody for your help and support. Rick -- Rick Emery Rick, Deepest sympathy. So you have a solution which works, for everyone, but doctrine dictates differently. I'd suspect VPN / IIS interaction. If I was your manager, I'd take comfort from the FACT that you were able to switch everything over to Linux and it ran w/o difficulty. Cripes, if you had this problem with ColdFusion you'd be sitting there, a lonely soul, amongst the finger-pointers, and nothing would be running. Best regards - Miles -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
Ugh, we're *never* going to make a decision. My boss just sent me this email: A *huge* "THANK YOU!" to everybody who replied; it was extremely helpful and, after my meeting with my manager this morning, she seemed to accept that the article was dated and had inaccurate information. Thanks for the update! Unfortunately, I may be fighting an uphill battle. I'll give background for those who seemed interested in our progress, but it's pretty long, so feel free to delete this and move on to your regularly scheduled messages (though I'm secretly hoping that someone will have helpful information or suggestions). I wrote an application, using PHP5, that displays a list and refreshes every 30 seconds (the data is constantly changing, but a 30 second delay is acceptable). As I've indicated previously, we're a Microsoft shop, so the data comes from MS SQL Server 2000. No problems, the app worked great using my workstation as the server with a few clients running the app from it. It even worked when we moved it to a server and opened it up to everyone on our intranet (for a while). We set the application up on a Windows 2000 Server with IIS (5, I think), and it would work fine for about a day. Then Padcom clients kept stopping. They'd request the page and, after a loong time, display a message that the request timed out. This would seemingly happen for all Padcom-connected clients at the same time, though the desktops continued to work fine. We restarted the server running the Padcom software with no effect. We restarted IIS on the web server with no effect. The only thing (seemingly) that cleared the issue was rebooting the server running IIS. Have you tried PHP 4.x? Give that a shot and see what effects that has on the application. I spent a day and a half looking at the issue with the network and server administrators, but nobody could find where the problem was. So, we moved it to a Windows 2003 Server with IIS 6; same problem. On my own, I set up a linux server with apache and placed the application there. They changed the DNS record to point to the linux server, and it has run flawlessly ever since (53 days, 22 hours, 11 minutes). Nobody has mentioned changing anything, until this morning. My manager informed me in our meeting that no language could be chosen unless it works under IIS. You might want to post the code for your application on the list so we all can see it (remember to remove usernames, passwords, and ip #'s). It's too bad you have to use Windows and IIS. Just curious but why are they not wanting to use Linux? Do they know it's free and way less likely to be attacked? Also, I'm sure there are people on this list that are experienced with Windows and IIS that can help you determine if something with the setup of it needs to be changed in order for your code to work. -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
Quoting Rick Emery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Ugh, we're *never* going to make a decision. My boss just sent me this email: A *huge* "THANK YOU!" to everybody who replied; it was extremely helpful and, after my meeting with my manager this morning, she seemed to accept that the article was dated and had inaccurate information. Unfortunately, I may be fighting an uphill battle. I'll give background for those who seemed interested in our progress, but it's pretty long, so feel free to delete this and move on to your regularly scheduled messages (though I'm secretly hoping that someone will have helpful information or suggestions). I wrote an application, using PHP5, that displays a list and refreshes every 30 seconds (the data is constantly changing, but a 30 second delay is acceptable). As I've indicated previously, we're a Microsoft shop, so the data comes from MS SQL Server 2000. No problems, the app worked great using my workstation as the server with a few clients running the app from it. It even worked when we moved it to a server and opened it up to everyone on our intranet (for a while). We have two different types of clients. Some use desktop computers, physically connected to our network, while others use mobile laptops connected to our network via cellular (using Sprint AirCards) using third-party VPN software (Padcom, in case anyone's familiar). We set the application up on a Windows 2000 Server with IIS (5, I think), and it would work fine for about a day. Then Padcom clients kept stopping. They'd request the page and, after a loong time, display a message that the request timed out. This would seemingly happen for all Padcom-connected clients at the same time, though the desktops continued to work fine. We restarted the server running the Padcom software with no effect. We restarted IIS on the web server with no effect. The only thing (seemingly) that cleared the issue was rebooting the server running IIS. I spent a day and a half looking at the issue with the network and server administrators, but nobody could find where the problem was. So, we moved it to a Windows 2003 Server with IIS 6; same problem. On my own, I set up a linux server with apache and placed the application there. They changed the DNS record to point to the linux server, and it has run flawlessly ever since (53 days, 22 hours, 11 minutes). Nobody has mentioned changing anything, until this morning. My manager informed me in our meeting that no language could be chosen unless it works under IIS. So, I'm faced with finding an obscur problem, running on obscur software (the vendor for Padcom, of course, insists that they've never seen this problem). I'm confident that the problem has *nothing* to do with PHP, but am forced by management to try to prove it. That's it in a nutshell. Thanks again to everybody for your help and support. Rick -- Rick Emery "When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the Earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there you will always long to return" -- Leonardo Da Vinci -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
On Mon, August 22, 2005 12:03 pm, Robert Cummings wrote: > On Mon, 2005-08-22 at 14:16, Rick Emery wrote: >> >> "I read the following article and I wanted your feedback on it. >> http://www.ukuug.org/events/linux2002/papers/html/php/#section_6. I I only read half-way through it... His first thesis (Section 2, after the Intro) that PHP's strength comes from co-mingling HTML and business logic has some merit... But, really, you can make a mess of that equally well in ANY language. Only a disciplined architecture and design will stop that. Section 3 Since this section is based on FACTUALLY INCORRECT statements, it's utter bullshit. Re-defining a function in PHP generates an error. The PHP class system provides distinct name-spaces for functions (and more) His entire these is un-tenable. Section 4 Again, FACTUALLY INCORRECT. Virtually *all* of the settings can be over-ridden in .htaccess, and/or in PHP code itself. At this point, I quit reading. It's clear the author has NO CLUE about how PHP actually works. When a guy writes a document that is all anti-PHP that is FACTUALLY INCORRECT, why would you bother to use it for anything at all? PS There are also several typos in the document, which never helps. -- Like Music? http://l-i-e.com/artists.htm -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
I've been coding in PHP since version 3 and I actually sold a telecommunications company to use it for their HUGE intranet back in 2000 (right before they went out of business in North America). They wanted to use Java and I talked them out of it for the simple fact that PHP was so easy to use and ease to develop. The learning curve for PHP vs. Java IMO was 10 times faster especially if you had people coming on board that didn't really know OOP that well. PHP was the perfect environment for people who do not have a lot of experience to learn a language really fast. Even working in it now for 5 years becoming I guess you could say an expert in PHP I find that really experienced people in PHP can fly through code and create huge applications in no time. Even those who have been programming in another language pick up PHP in just a matter of days and begin to fly around it creating things very quickly. Out of all my developer friends those who know PHP love it because it is so easy. I have never once heard of an application becoming too complex because of it's ease. That to me is just silly ignorant talk. The guy who wrote that article about PHP obviously don't know what he is doing and I would argue he was hired by Microsoft to write something against it because as John Pina Craven said, "innovation is the enemy of the status quo - it puts people out of business." :) You'll have to let us know what the final decision is. jay On Aug 22, 2005, at 1:16 PM, Rick Emery wrote: Quoting Rick Emery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: My employer has (finally) decided to take full advantage of our intranet, and wants to move from client-server applications to web-based applications. [snipped] Any input would be greatly appreciated. Opinions are welcome (especially from programmers with experience in both), but I have to "sell" it to management (I'm already on the PHP side), so links to data or articles comparing the two are best. Ugh, we're *never* going to make a decision. My boss just sent me this email: "I read the following article and I wanted your feedback on it. http://www.ukuug.org/events/linux2002/papers/html/php/#section_6. I have read enough articles to know that the author can slant things one way or another depending on their personal preferences. I am off to my Dr?s appointment but I would like to discuss this with you when we both get a chance. The last two sections are the primary concern. I do know the article was written 3 years ago and that may have impact as well." Anybody care to provide words of wisdom to me before I meet with her? I hate doing this, as I'm sure everybody has better things to do, but I *really* want to sell PHP. Thanks in advance, Rick -- Rick Emery "When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the Earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there you will always long to return" -- Leonardo Da Vinci -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
On Mon, 2005-08-22 at 14:16, Rick Emery wrote: > > "I read the following article and I wanted your feedback on it. > http://www.ukuug.org/events/linux2002/papers/html/php/#section_6. I Just another small comment on this... It's interesting to note that the author headlines the specific section as "When To Use PHP" and then goes on to itemize why he thinks you shouldn't use PHP. This is classic FUD based style since naturally readers jump to sections to see the pros and cons of something. This guy set it up so that he covers the cons, but when you jump to see the pros, he just summarizes his idea of the cons again so readers think it's a lose/lose situation. Cheers, Rob. -- .. | InterJinn Application Framework - http://www.interjinn.com | :: | An application and templating framework for PHP. Boasting | | a powerful, scalable system for accessing system services | | such as forms, properties, sessions, and caches. InterJinn | | also provides an extremely flexible architecture for | | creating re-usable components quickly and easily. | `' -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
RE: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
On Mon, 2005-08-22 at 14:51, Alan Fullmer wrote: > So pardon me butting in on this conversation.. > > I was completely unaware that you were able to do separate php.ini files. > > I did know you could do things through htaccess, etc. Is there a way to do > this separately in http.conf? with virtual domains? Probably, but I think you meant to respond to Jay Blanchard's post since he's the one who said you can have multiple php.ini files :) I imagine it might be possible in the httpd.conf but don't know since I've never looked. Definitely you could run two webservers and use the proxy-pass thingy like is done when running PHP4 and PHP5 on the same site. Cheers, Rob. -- .. | InterJinn Application Framework - http://www.interjinn.com | :: | An application and templating framework for PHP. Boasting | | a powerful, scalable system for accessing system services | | such as forms, properties, sessions, and caches. InterJinn | | also provides an extremely flexible architecture for | | creating re-usable components quickly and easily. | `' -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
On Mon, 2005-08-22 at 14:16, Rick Emery wrote: > > http://www.ukuug.org/events/linux2002/papers/html/php/#section_6 Wow, that sure is a crock of FUD bullshit. I'll answer in order of appearance, I don't want to quote in case of copyright issues. 1. Most interesting settings in php.ini can be set via an apache virtual directory configuration or .htaccess override. So the point raised is moot. The settings you'll care about for multiple servers are usually "register_globals" and "magic_quotes". These are both controllable via this technique. 2. No language effectively promotes teamwork. This is why concurrent versioning systems like CVS exist. Now, some development environments promote teamwork, but again, they usually just employ their own versioning system... and many just provide hooks to a CVS repository itself. 3. Actually number of distinct pages suggest better teamwork since developers and content authors can work on different pages simultaneously. The code in the background if properly separated from the content will not affect development of content at all (except where bugs might occur :) 4. Using PHP buys you plenty. There is no language that enforces a programmer to adhere to specific principles of business logic and content separation when they are stupid, ignorant, or don't care. I personally recommend extending PHP with a templating language, but others will definitely argue otherwise... that's a question of personal taste. Either way, PHP buys you a massive developer base, the potential for an inexperience coder to quickly become competent, and lots and lots of free already written software you can use if you want. Again though, look what using VB in the past bought managers? The big headache of VB.net which wasn't compatible. So sounds like you may get screwed regardless. There's absolutely nothing that guarantees your future... it doesn't exist yet. 5. There are thousands and thousands of experienced developers out there using PHP. The sign of experience is not what language you use, but what you can do with a language. Personally I find PHP simple yet extremely powerful. I can't say I've ever felt hindered-- but then maybe I'm still inexperienced *grin*. Cheers, Rob. -- .. | InterJinn Application Framework - http://www.interjinn.com | :: | An application and templating framework for PHP. Boasting | | a powerful, scalable system for accessing system services | | such as forms, properties, sessions, and caches. InterJinn | | also provides an extremely flexible architecture for | | creating re-usable components quickly and easily. | `' -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
RE: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
[snip] Anybody care to provide words of wisdom to me before I meet with her? I hate doing this, as I'm sure everybody has better things to do, but I *really* want to sell PHP. [/snip] 6. When to Use PHP [snip] How much control will you have over the deployment platform? PHP's one-size-fits-all approach to the php.ini file makes it hard to share servers with sites that were developed with different settings. [/snip] This is no longer (or was never) the case as multiple php.ini's can be configured. Not only that multiple versions of PHP can be run on the same machine. [snip] How many people will work on the site, now and in the future? PHP as a language lacks the features necessary to promote effective teamwork; the bigger your team, the greater the problems you'll have. [/snip] Any effective CVS will let you manage this well, no matter the language. [snip] How big will the site be, in terms of numbers of distinct pages? This is related to the previous item: the bigger the site, the greater your need will be for language features that promote teamwork. [/snip] Bzzzt. Thanks for playing (Same as above) [snip] How long will the site be expected to last? The longer it lasts, the more likely it is that significant design changes will be needed. If you use PHP in the obvious manner, major design changes are difficult. If you extend PHP with a templating system, whether ad hoc or carefully enforced, using PHP buys you little if anything. [/snip] Now it becomes obvious that the author had never used or attempted to use PHP in a collaborative enterprise environment. The above statement I would consider false. [snip] How experienced are the developers; and how complex will the site need to be? Experienced developers will find themselves hindered rather than helped by the language's simplicity. Inexperienced developers will find the simplicity a significant boon - but if you have inexperienced developers trying to develop a complicated dynamic site, you will soon run into other problems. [/snip] Again, I find this comment to be unfounded. Experienced developers are able to do great things with PHP because of the wealth of functions and the flexibility allowed. Inexperienced developers can generally be brought along very quickly so that the cost/benefit analysis leans towards the plus side very quickly. 7. Conclusions PHP is a convenient language for rapidly prototyping simple dynamic websites. Websites thus built can in many cases be deployed indefinitely, without spending time and money on refactoring code in a different language. PHP's simplicity makes it a good language for inexperienced programmers, such as those moving from a pure page-design rôle to a site development one. [snip] For more experienced developers, though, the language's simplicity rapidly turns into complexity, slowing down the development process. These developers are the ones who have the skills needed to build large and/or complex websites; using PHP for such sites therefore tends to be a net loss. This tendency is reinforced by PHP's lack of the linguistic features needed to promote working on large software projects. If your project is at all large or complex, it may be better to look elsewhere when choosing an implementation language. [/snip] Again, this is just not true and demonstrates the author's lack of working knowledge of the language and the deployment of the language at the time the article was written, much less today. We manage several millions of records each day with PHP in an enterprise situation and have no issue with complexity. [snip] In cases where PHP has been determined to be inappropriate, what language should be used? There is considerable choice here; few languages are as bad as PHP for doing serious development work. The author and his colleagues have had good results with Perl, and believe that languages such as C++, Java, and Python should serve equally well. [/snip] Again, the author demonstrates a completye lack of knowledge. PERL can be extremely complex, has a high learning curve, and lacks a certain finesse. All of the languages mentioned find their roots in C, including PHP. So the argument he makes here is a straw man arguement at best. Seriously, several corporations world-wide are using PHP at an enterprise level (a much bally-hooed but particularly worthless term) each and every day. -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
Quoting Rick Emery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: My employer has (finally) decided to take full advantage of our intranet, and wants to move from client-server applications to web-based applications. [snipped] Any input would be greatly appreciated. Opinions are welcome (especially from programmers with experience in both), but I have to "sell" it to management (I'm already on the PHP side), so links to data or articles comparing the two are best. Ugh, we're *never* going to make a decision. My boss just sent me this email: "I read the following article and I wanted your feedback on it. http://www.ukuug.org/events/linux2002/papers/html/php/#section_6. I have read enough articles to know that the author can slant things one way or another depending on their personal preferences. I am off to my Dr?s appointment but I would like to discuss this with you when we both get a chance. The last two sections are the primary concern. I do know the article was written 3 years ago and that may have impact as well." Anybody care to provide words of wisdom to me before I meet with her? I hate doing this, as I'm sure everybody has better things to do, but I *really* want to sell PHP. Thanks in advance, Rick -- Rick Emery "When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the Earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there you will always long to return" -- Leonardo Da Vinci -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
Matthew Weier O'Phinney wrote: You've insinuated several times that PHP is not 'scalable to an enterprise level'. Could you perhaps explain what you mean by this? Anyone who is trying to argue that ColdFusion is easier to scale than PHP (both can be made to) hasn't had to handle significant traffic. I have experience trying to scale ColdFusion (this was a job years ago for the USPS), and it's not easy once you pass a certain threshhold. I don't think it was a lack of expertise either - I had some of the top consultants from Allaire trying to solve the problem, including the author of ClusterCATS. Application servers are nice, but I prefer the minimalistic "shared nothing" approach that PHP takes. Chris -- Chris Shiflett Brain Bulb, The PHP Consultancy http://brainbulb.com/ -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
On Fri, 2005-07-01 at 19:01, Mark Charette wrote: > It is always funny to read that one needs OO approches to do anything > useful. What one needs is a modular approach, re-factoring, and knowing I never said that you NEED OO approach to do anything. I found some problems where an OO approach helped me better than a linear approach, and the inverse is also true. My point was that a language that gives you the choice of programming style is interesting. Both CF and PHP give you the choice to use OOP or not. Today, everyone agrees that procedural languages are an evolution from BASIC-style linear programming. Also, one can agree that OOP is an evolution from procedural programming. Now, one can choose to stick with linear programming, procedural programming or OOP. This is a matter of personal taste, trade-offs that have a different meaning from one individual to another. You can achieve modularity with procedural coding. But, you need to do it yourself, while modularity is at the heart of OOP. You may prefer linear or procedural coding over OOP, but surely not for modularity. Stéphane -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
Andrew Scott wrote: I agree with you, but why does the installer package not come with everything to get you going to begin with, that was my original question to begin with a long time ago not on this list of course. I can't speak for whoever made the decision to keep what's included with the installer to the most commonly used modules but I think it's safe to assume the reason was to avoid unnecessary bloat. Why include something you probably won't need? KiSS and life will be easier. Anyways, I'm done with this now. You clearly have no specific technical reason for believing CF is better than PHP beyond the installation process which I'm sure we can both agree is not enough to sway the decision either way. I for one think it's a very good thing that it's a fairly manual process, but each to his own. -Stut -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
Stéphane Bruno wrote: Once you get to do very advanced things, you need to code using Object Oriented approaches, modular programming, web services, etc. which both products allow you to do. I guess those non-linear crash codes I wrote in Fortran not so many years ago aren't very advanced ... :) It is always funny to read that one needs OO approches to do anything useful. What one needs is a modular approach, re-factoring, and knowing how and why to make tradeoffs when writing code. In any programming language. -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
On 01/07/05, Andrew Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Stut, > > FYI here is a copy of the text after installing php. >Warning > >Be aware, that this setup of PHP is not secure. If you would like to >have a secure PHP setup, you'd better go on the manual way, and set >every option carefully. This automatically working setup gives you an >instantly working PHP installation, but it is not meant to be used on >online servers. Ok, now I see the root of your comment. Maybe it's just me but I never assume that any automatic installation will create a secure environment. The reason for that is that the installer cannot possibly know what it needs to do to make the system secure - that's what sysadmins are for. I must also point out that a system that used this installer to set up PHP can be secured in exactly the same way as any other in much the same way as anyone doing it manually can create a setup that is less secure than using the installer to do it for them. So, I was technically wrong but IMHO the point is flawed since nothing should be assumed to be secure out of the box. With that convenient diversion hopefully settled you are still yet to convince me that CF offers any significant advantage over PHP. -Stut -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: Re[2]: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
Hello, I followed the discussions closely. I wanted to reply to some questions I saw in the discussions. I am using both PHP and Coldfusion, but both on Linux platforms. So, I am not bound to Microsoft technologies, and CF runs faster on Linux/Unix than on Windows. Like PHP, there is no need for a dedicated IDE to code/script on CF. You may use Macromedia software to build web pages only if you want, except if you want to make Flash movies/animations. You can edit files manually to configure CF (XML files) with a ssh access on the server (at least the Linux version I am used to), or use a web interface to manage it. Both languages have pros and cons, and I cannot say that one is superior to the other. It is a matter of taste. I know that someone coming from a programming background will be more comfortable with PHP, while someone coming from a web design background may be more comfortable with CF, but even that is changing. Once you get to do very advanced things, you need to code using Object Oriented approaches, modular programming, web services, etc. which both products allow you to do. It is true that Coldfusion offers a lot of functionality 'out of the box', and sometimes you need to look around to find equivalent functionality, extensions for PHP. These functionalities are more geared towards displaying data, managing forms, etc. PHP also offers a lot of functionalities out of the box also. For example, PHP is really flexible about how you want to retrieve a query, in what format, etc. The functionalities are more geared towards programming utilities. You can extend Coldfusion functionalities easily by creating 'custom tags' in Perl, C, C++ or Java without having to recompile the product. You can also instantiate any classes in Java because Coldfusion is based on Java since version 5. So, it's really a matter of personal taste and the background of each one. I personally take pleasure developing applications on both Coldfusion and PHP. Stéphane On Fri, 2005-07-01 at 09:50, Richard Davey wrote: > Hello Andrew, > > Friday, July 1, 2005, 3:06:49 PM, you wrote: > > AS> You know for a php developer your really don't know your own product to > AS> well (blah blah blah) > > Isn't it time to run off and write another check to Adobe or > something? Rather than personally attacking other list members. > > Best regards, > > Richard Davey > -- > http://www.launchcode.co.uk - PHP Development Services > "I do not fear computers. I fear the lack of them." - Isaac Asimov -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
RE: Re[2]: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
Actually that's not true, reply to: is not a hack and is very much a standard to include in the headers, its part of the rfc standard, after having written a mail server as a project its not hard to create a mailinglist option that sets this info up properly. If you setup your mail client with the reply to field different to your email address, your email client will add this line or did you not know that? -Original Message- From: Richard Davey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, 2 July 2005 12:49 AM To: php-general@lists.php.net Subject: Re[2]: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion Hello Andrew, Friday, July 1, 2005, 3:32:14 PM, you wrote: AS> Well I am on about 20-30 as well, and when I press reply it goes to a AS> mailinglist address for broadcasting not the posters email address. Most likely because they've bastardised the mail headers to force in a reply-to address that wasn't ever there. Thankfully most people on this list understand that when an email arrives from an address, "reply" will reply to it. Having said that, it does catch a lot of noobs out. Best regards, Richard Davey -- http://www.launchcode.co.uk - PHP Development Services "I do not fear computers. I fear the lack of them." - Isaac Asimov -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
RE: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
Stut, FYI here is a copy of the text after installing php. Windows Installer The Windows PHP installer is available from the downloads page at http://www.php.net/downloads.php. This installs the CGI version of PHP and for IIS, PWS, and Xitami, it configures the web server as well. The installer does not include any extra external PHP extensions (php_*.dll) as you'll only find those in the Windows Zip Package and PECL downloads. Note: While the Windows installer is an easy way to make PHP work, it is restricted in many aspects as, for example, the automatic setup of extensions is not supported. Use of the installer isn't the preferred method for installing PHP. First, install your selected HTTP (web) server on your system, and make sure that it works. Run the executable installer and follow the instructions provided by the installation wizard. Two types of installation are supported - standard, which provides sensible defaults for all the settings it can, and advanced, which asks questions as it goes along. The installation wizard gathers enough information to set up the php.ini file, and configure certain web servers to use PHP. One of the web servers the PHP installer does not configure for is Apache, so you'll need to configure it manually. Once the installation has completed, the installer will inform you if you need to restart your system, restart the server, or just start using PHP. Warning Be aware, that this setup of PHP is not secure. If you would like to have a secure PHP setup, you'd better go on the manual way, and set every option carefully. This automatically working setup gives you an instantly working PHP installation, but it is not meant to be used on online servers. -Original Message- From: Stut [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, 2 July 2005 12:50 AM To: Andrew Scott Cc: php-general@lists.php.net Subject: Re: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion Andrew Scott wrote: > Hey it's not my fault that this stupid list needs a reply all! While I agree with Jay that this is degrading into a meaningless slanging match (of which I hope I have not caused) but I feel that I must respond to your comments despite your personal attacks. > I am going to guess Stut, that you don't know even know what the difference > between a singleton instantiated object is to a standard instantiated > object? I don't see the relevance of singletons when it comes to this discussion. The architecture that PHP utilises means it can handle as many concurrent requests as the web server will allow it to. If I understand the J2EE model correctly, and I've said before that my knowledge of it is sketchy at best, you create a number of instances of the application and the application server handles distributing requests between them. This is the same model as PHP except that there is an extra layer between the web server and the application itself in J2EE - namely the application server. If I have this completely wrong please say so, but for $DEITYs sake don't simply say I have it wrong again without explaining why. You seem to be intent on skirting around telling us precisely what makes J2EE a better solution in your opinion. I would be more than happy to hear about it and take it on board because it might convince me to investigate whether it might be worth getting to know it better. I'm sure most other people on this list are also open to learning about alternatives. But until you actually back up your statements rather than turning to personal attacks there will be no benefit to anyone. > You know for a php developer your really don't know your own product to > well, and by your statement of no known security issues with an installer > package (one file to execute to setup everything you need and in the right > locations) not 3 packages one with the binaries one with the libraries and > the third with partial of the other 2. And if you bothered to read the text > in your chosen language you would know about the security issues. Ok that was an extraordinarily spectacular sentence that means very little. "The text"?? What text? I see no reference to security issues directly related to the Win32 installer on the PHP website. If I'm suffering from temporary blindness I would appreciate a URL or other reference so I can see more clearly. -Stut -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re[2]: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
Hello Andrew, Friday, July 1, 2005, 3:06:49 PM, you wrote: AS> You know for a php developer your really don't know your own product to AS> well (blah blah blah) Isn't it time to run off and write another check to Adobe or something? Rather than personally attacking other list members. Best regards, Richard Davey -- http://www.launchcode.co.uk - PHP Development Services "I do not fear computers. I fear the lack of them." - Isaac Asimov -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
Andrew Scott wrote: Hey it's not my fault that this stupid list needs a reply all! While I agree with Jay that this is degrading into a meaningless slanging match (of which I hope I have not caused) but I feel that I must respond to your comments despite your personal attacks. I am going to guess Stut, that you don't know even know what the difference between a singleton instantiated object is to a standard instantiated object? I don't see the relevance of singletons when it comes to this discussion. The architecture that PHP utilises means it can handle as many concurrent requests as the web server will allow it to. If I understand the J2EE model correctly, and I've said before that my knowledge of it is sketchy at best, you create a number of instances of the application and the application server handles distributing requests between them. This is the same model as PHP except that there is an extra layer between the web server and the application itself in J2EE - namely the application server. If I have this completely wrong please say so, but for $DEITYs sake don't simply say I have it wrong again without explaining why. You seem to be intent on skirting around telling us precisely what makes J2EE a better solution in your opinion. I would be more than happy to hear about it and take it on board because it might convince me to investigate whether it might be worth getting to know it better. I'm sure most other people on this list are also open to learning about alternatives. But until you actually back up your statements rather than turning to personal attacks there will be no benefit to anyone. You know for a php developer your really don't know your own product to well, and by your statement of no known security issues with an installer package (one file to execute to setup everything you need and in the right locations) not 3 packages one with the binaries one with the libraries and the third with partial of the other 2. And if you bothered to read the text in your chosen language you would know about the security issues. Ok that was an extraordinarily spectacular sentence that means very little. "The text"?? What text? I see no reference to security issues directly related to the Win32 installer on the PHP website. If I'm suffering from temporary blindness I would appreciate a URL or other reference so I can see more clearly. -Stut -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re[2]: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
Hello Andrew, Friday, July 1, 2005, 3:32:14 PM, you wrote: AS> Well I am on about 20-30 as well, and when I press reply it goes to a AS> mailinglist address for broadcasting not the posters email address. Most likely because they've bastardised the mail headers to force in a reply-to address that wasn't ever there. Thankfully most people on this list understand that when an email arrives from an address, "reply" will reply to it. Having said that, it does catch a lot of noobs out. Best regards, Richard Davey -- http://www.launchcode.co.uk - PHP Development Services "I do not fear computers. I fear the lack of them." - Isaac Asimov -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
Greg Donald wrote: Sounds like the pebkac to me. What is my marketing manager doing over there? ;) -- John C. Nichel ÜberGeek KegWorks.com 716.856.9675 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
On 7/1/05, Andrew Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > But I guess you get what you pay for:-) Feel free to go away if the deal isn't working for you. -- Greg Donald Zend Certified Engineer MySQL Core Certification http://destiney.com/ -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
On 7/1/05, Andrew Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hey it's not my fault that this stupid list needs a reply all! My reply-to-all button is right next to my reply button. Sounds like the pebkac to me. -- Greg Donald Zend Certified Engineer MySQL Core Certification http://destiney.com/ -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
George Pitcher wrote: You need to define 'normal mailing list'. I'm on about 20 different lists and only one of them has a default of 'reply to all'. 'Normal', as in 'point and click users' mailing lists. You know the lists where they have to _hack_ the headers to add a Reply-To because the users of said list don't know how to use their mail clients. That kind of 'normal'. -- John C. Nichel ÜberGeek KegWorks.com 716.856.9675 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
RE: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
Well I am on about 20-30 as well, and when I press reply it goes to a mailinglist address for broadcasting not the posters email address. -Original Message- From: George Pitcher [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, 2 July 2005 12:26 AM To: Andrew Scott; 'John Nichel'; php-general@lists.php.net Subject: RE: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion You need to define 'normal mailing list'. I'm on about 20 different lists and only one of them has a default of 'reply to all'. George > -Original Message- > From: Andrew Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 1 July 2005 3:22 pm > To: 'John Nichel'; php-general@lists.php.net > Subject: RE: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion > > > John you're funny. > > No serious, these php lists don't work like the normal mailing lists where > it send to an email address that is then broadcast to subscribers. > > But I guess you get what you pay for:-) > > > > -Original Message- > From: John Nichel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Saturday, 2 July 2005 12:15 AM > To: php-general@lists.php.net > Subject: Re: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion > > Andrew Scott wrote: > > Hey it's not my fault that this stupid list needs a reply all! > > > Learn how to use your mail client instead of expecting someone to > bastardize the email headers. > > Andrew, meet /dev/null; /dev/null this is Andrew. > > -- > John C. Nichel > ÜberGeek > KegWorks.com > 716.856.9675 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- > PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > > -- > PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > > -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
RE: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
You need to define 'normal mailing list'. I'm on about 20 different lists and only one of them has a default of 'reply to all'. George > -Original Message- > From: Andrew Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 1 July 2005 3:22 pm > To: 'John Nichel'; php-general@lists.php.net > Subject: RE: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion > > > John you're funny. > > No serious, these php lists don't work like the normal mailing lists where > it send to an email address that is then broadcast to subscribers. > > But I guess you get what you pay for:-) > > > > -Original Message- > From: John Nichel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Saturday, 2 July 2005 12:15 AM > To: php-general@lists.php.net > Subject: Re: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion > > Andrew Scott wrote: > > Hey it's not my fault that this stupid list needs a reply all! > > > Learn how to use your mail client instead of expecting someone to > bastardize the email headers. > > Andrew, meet /dev/null; /dev/null this is Andrew. > > -- > John C. Nichel > ÜberGeek > KegWorks.com > 716.856.9675 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- > PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > > -- > PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > > -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
RE: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
John you're funny. No serious, these php lists don't work like the normal mailing lists where it send to an email address that is then broadcast to subscribers. But I guess you get what you pay for:-) -Original Message- From: John Nichel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, 2 July 2005 12:15 AM To: php-general@lists.php.net Subject: Re: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion Andrew Scott wrote: > Hey it's not my fault that this stupid list needs a reply all! Learn how to use your mail client instead of expecting someone to bastardize the email headers. Andrew, meet /dev/null; /dev/null this is Andrew. -- John C. Nichel ÜberGeek KegWorks.com 716.856.9675 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
Andrew Scott wrote: Hey it's not my fault that this stupid list needs a reply all! Learn how to use your mail client instead of expecting someone to bastardize the email headers. Andrew, meet /dev/null; /dev/null this is Andrew. -- John C. Nichel ÜberGeek KegWorks.com 716.856.9675 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
RE: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
[snip] Hey it's not my fault that this stupid list needs a reply all! [/snip] That's enough. This has begun to degrade into a pissing contest. Personal attacks don't fly here. -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
RE: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
Hey it's not my fault that this stupid list needs a reply all! I am going to guess Stut, that you don't know even know what the difference between a singleton instantiated object is to a standard instantiated object? You know for a php developer your really don't know your own product to well, and by your statement of no known security issues with an installer package (one file to execute to setup everything you need and in the right locations) not 3 packages one with the binaries one with the libraries and the third with partial of the other 2. And if you bothered to read the text in your chosen language you would know about the security issues. -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
When you reply please include the list in the recipients! Andrew Scott wrote: Well at least I know that there are a few developers in here that are not very savvy when it comes to Enterprise Solutions with J2EE then. That's a fair point, but rather than pointing it out it would be helpful if you elaborated on your points rather than taking the "if you don't know then I'm not going to tell you" approach. Multiple instances, what do you think this means or I guess you don't have the concept of instantiation? Again, meaning what? Running several copies of the application on a single server? Why would I want to do that? I am aware of the installation package for php for windows, but why is it not part of the main package to begin with, why a separate package. I asked this once before and was told because of security issues, can only go by what I have been told. I did say correct me if I am wrong! Ok, let's start with the "main package". For PHP the "main package" is the source code. You're clearly not very familiar with the way software is distributed in the OSS world. In addition to the source code the PHP site generously distributes two other packages for the Win32 platform - a zip file and an installation package. Personally when I'm forced to use Win32 as a server platform I always use the zip package because I'm very picky about what gets installed where. As for the security issues I'm not familiar with any security issues that arise from using the installation package. If there were any I'm sure they would have been published and almost certainly fixed by now. As far as Shared hosting, I can only say that you have led a sheltered life in your development cycle and don't know that applications that run in a shared environment such as one server running 13 websites can be a security risk. I think that if you understood what J2EE is all about first, then I wouldn't be having to explain myself on what J2EE is in depth. Hmm, maybe I have led a sheltered life. I mean I've only been involved with hosting companies for the past 15 years and have been running my own hosting company for nearly 9 years, what would I know?!! I won't disagree that shared hosting environments have a lot of implications for security. I won't disagree that I don't know very much about J2EE. What I would question is your assertion that J2EE provides any extra security in a shared hosting environment than you can get with any other system if the server is properly set up and your application takes reasonable precautions. Having your application on a shared server is never going to be as secure as having your own dedicated server just as much as having a dedicated server in a third parties facility will never be as secure as hosting it in your own facility. Again if J2EE does provide extra security that cannot be achieved with PHP please let me know. I urge you not to come back with another "J2EE is better" but rather to explain why with specific features that make it better. -Stut -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
In a message dated 6/29/2005 11:26:08 A.M. Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Yes a framework can be built in PHP, C# or any language but how would you like to design something like this. How about something like Prado? looks just like it. _http://xisc.com_ (http://xisc.com)
Re: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
On 6/30/05, Andrew Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > OK. > > What is J2EE, if you know the answer to that then you will know that php > doesn't have the ability to run as multiple instances. Lets take security > for example, php is known to not have an installer because of security > correct me if I am wrong on this assumption. I am only going by what I hear > here. > > So with that in mind let's talk about shared hosting, can you run php and > know that your website is secured in a shared hosting environment. That's > what J2EE is all about, being able to run multiple instance of an > application and CF can do this extremely well and be extremely secured. If by shared hosting you mean multiple websites on one physical machine, well, it really depends on how things are set up. It is possible to run multiple instances of Linux on one computer and have each site running in a different one. So assuming that both CF and PHP can be deployed in a secure environment I would say that it's very easy to write insecure applications in both, shared hosting or otherwise. Neither is necessarily more secure than the other. I think most languages and platforms are going to have thier own set of security concerns. - Brad -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
Andrew Scott wrote: OK. What is J2EE, if you know the answer to that then you will know that php doesn't have the ability to run as multiple instances. Lets take security for example, php is known to not have an installer because of security correct me if I am wrong on this assumption. I am only going by what I hear here. So with that in mind let's talk about shared hosting, can you run php and know that your website is secured in a shared hosting environment. That's what J2EE is all about, being able to run multiple instance of an application and CF can do this extremely well and be extremely secured. I've stayed away from this because I really don't know enough about Cold Fusion to compare them. With your above statements, and others you have made in this thread, it is clear you do not know enough about PHP (or Java for that matter) to compare the two. Why don't you do all of us poor little PHP developers a favor, and go beat your chest about CF somewhere else. -- By-Tor.com ...it's all about the Rush http://www.by-tor.com -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: Re[2]: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
On 6/30/05, Matthew Weier O'Phinney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > That doesn't address scalability, however. So, let's look at that. I'm > not sure how CF scales, not having been in a CF shop. However, I know > what I can do to scale PHP: > > * Use code optimizers/bytecode caches (zend, apc, eAccelerator) > * Build an LVS-HA cluster for a web farm (i.e., increase the number of > machines able to serve data and pages) > * Focus on code optimization (i.e., make my code as efficient as > possible) These also apply to CF. However, the built-in caching offered by CF (and by that I mean the ability to store something in memory, like the application scope) can actually be a draw back when going to a multi-server environment. For example, say you have a query that you would like to keep in memory for faster access. You can put this in one of the shared scopes and you are all set. It's very easy, but when you add another server, you now have that query duplicated on both servers. Suppose you have many queries, or other objects that you would like to keep in memory. Using this technique, they are all duplicated on all of the servers. I don't think that is a very efficient use of resources. Of course it doesn't have to be done that way. - Brad -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
Andrew Scott wrote: OK. What is J2EE, if you know the answer to that then you will know that php doesn't have the ability to run as multiple instances. Lets take security for example, php is known to not have an installer because of security correct me if I am wrong on this assumption. I am only going by what I hear here. First of all PHP does have installation utilities. There's one for Win32, there's the port in FreeBSD and I'm sure there are others (RPMs and the like). Multiple instances in what sense? If you mean multiple servers running the same application this is very possible with PHP. If that's not what you mean please elaborate. So with that in mind let's talk about shared hosting, can you run php and know that your website is secured in a shared hosting environment. That's what J2EE is all about, being able to run multiple instance of an application and CF can do this extremely well and be extremely secured. What does J2EE provide that makes it any more secure in a shared hosting environment than PHP? Again you have made a statement without explaining the reasons behind it. -Stut -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
RE: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
[snip] What is J2EE, if you know the answer to that then you will know that php doesn't have the ability to run as multiple instances. Lets take security for example, php is known to not have an installer because of security correct me if I am wrong on this assumption. I am only going by what I hear here. [/snip] What do you mean "multiple instances"? And how does that apply to EE? I do not think that the reason PHP doesn't have an installer has anything to do with security. [snip] So with that in mind let's talk about shared hosting, can you run php and know that your website is secured in a shared hosting environment. That's what J2EE is all about, being able to run multiple instance of an application and CF can do this extremely well and be extremely secured. [/snip] Any site developed properly in PHP will run in a shared hosting environment securely. -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
RE: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
[snip] > Cons for PHP: > - > Coldfusion is also free (Blue Dragon) and has just as much support as PHP, > although. PHP can not run in a J2EE environment, limiting it to small scall > websites and limiting the prospect of expansion or server migration. I'm wondering if you could expand on this some. How does not running in a J2EE environment limit PHPs ability to expand? In my opinion this is not the case, but I'm always open to being convinced otherwise. I'm also curious what you mean by small scale. [/snip] It occurs to me that some may think that J2EE is required for enterprise level applications, which is not the necessarily the case. It is a matter of splitting hairs. But if you want to use the two together there are several articles and how-to's on the web. I think that what is going on here is that, depending on who you talk to, "enterprise level" means different things. -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
RE: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
OK. What is J2EE, if you know the answer to that then you will know that php doesn't have the ability to run as multiple instances. Lets take security for example, php is known to not have an installer because of security correct me if I am wrong on this assumption. I am only going by what I hear here. So with that in mind let's talk about shared hosting, can you run php and know that your website is secured in a shared hosting environment. That's what J2EE is all about, being able to run multiple instance of an application and CF can do this extremely well and be extremely secured. -Original Message- From: Brad Pauly [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, 30 June 2005 10:54 PM To: php-general@lists.php.net Subject: Re: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion On 6/30/05, Andrew Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Cons for PHP: > - > Coldfusion is also free (Blue Dragon) and has just as much support as PHP, > although. PHP can not run in a J2EE environment, limiting it to small scall > websites and limiting the prospect of expansion or server migration. I'm wondering if you could expand on this some. How does not running in a J2EE environment limit PHPs ability to expand? In my opinion this is not the case, but I'm always open to being convinced otherwise. I'm also curious what you mean by small scale. - Brad -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -Original Message- From: Brad Pauly [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, 30 June 2005 10:54 PM To: php-general@lists.php.net Subject: Re: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion On 6/30/05, Andrew Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Cons for PHP: > - > Coldfusion is also free (Blue Dragon) and has just as much support as PHP, > although. PHP can not run in a J2EE environment, limiting it to small scall > websites and limiting the prospect of expansion or server migration. I'm wondering if you could expand on this some. How does not running in a J2EE environment limit PHPs ability to expand? In my opinion this is not the case, but I'm always open to being convinced otherwise. I'm also curious what you mean by small scale. - Brad -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: Re[2]: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
* "Andrew Scott" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > CF is very rapid development, and you might say the same about PHP. > The point is that these are all the things you need to take into > consideration, the cost that it would take to develop and maintain in > either language, as well as cost involved in the need of the > application having to be a true enterprise solution. > > I am not here to bag php, I am here to make some points about the cost > of the application in the overall scenario. Would you develop in a > language that you know could not deliver an enterprise solution if in > 6 months that's what you really need, and how would you look if you > recommended a language because it was free, but in time had to spend > more again to make it fully scalable to an enterprise level if it > needed it. You've insinuated several times that PHP is not 'scalable to an enterprise level'. Could you perhaps explain what you mean by this? One informal definition for 'enterprise framework' I've read recently is "an enterprise framework allows the end-user to drop in only the business logic to make it work; they do not need to add anymore programming to the framework" (http://benramsey.com/2005/05/09/what-is-an-enterprise-framework/) Now, I've seen a number of PHP frameworks where this is the case; you drop in a config file of some sort, point your application to it, and voila! Solution delivered! That doesn't address scalability, however. So, let's look at that. I'm not sure how CF scales, not having been in a CF shop. However, I know what I can do to scale PHP: * Use code optimizers/bytecode caches (zend, apc, eAccelerator) * Build an LVS-HA cluster for a web farm (i.e., increase the number of machines able to serve data and pages) * Focus on code optimization (i.e., make my code as efficient as possible) (As an aside, the beauty of a cluster is that you can add or subtract machines without the public noticing; the site remains up. Additionally, since all the director does is pass requests to the nodes, and possibly relay the responses back to the requestor, you can have machines of just about any configuration running on the backend -- Linux, FreeBSD, Windows, etc. -- so long as they speak the HTTP protocol.) Could you please share why you feel PHP isn't enterprise ready, or why CF is more enterprise ready? Other than the java integration; others have pointed out that the Zend platform addresses that issue. -- Matthew Weier O'Phinney Zend Certified Engineer http://weierophinney.net/matthew/ -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
Andrew Scott wrote: CF is very rapid development, and you might say the same about PHP. The point is that these are all the things you need to take into consideration, the cost that it would take to develop and maintain in either language, as well as cost involved in the need of the application having to be a true enterprise solution. I am not here to bag php, I am here to make some points about the cost of the application in the overall scenario. Would you develop in a language that you know could not deliver an enterprise solution if in 6 months that's what you really need, and how would you look if you recommended a language because it was free, but in time had to spend more again to make it fully scalable to an enterprise level if it needed it. My point is that both languages have their merits, both have their advantages and disadvantages, but what about the cost is it really worth not researching something properly before jumping into bed with what you think might work? Why do you believe PHP is not capable of being the basis of a "true enterprise solution"? You've said that several times now without backing it up and I'd like to hear your reasons so I'm better informed next time I have to make this kind of decision. I know what I would do if someone who worked for me, came to me an recommended a language and had not done the research into all possible paths, that person would be very answerable to why we had to spend more down the track. In my experience if you develop a PHP system with a view to scalability (as you would no doubt need to with CF also) the most you would need to spend to allow it to scale up to an "enterprise solution" is to purchase something like the Zend Platform and more hardware which from what I know is likely to be cheaper than the equivalent requirements for CF. Now that you have bagged CF, lets look at PHP. The amount of work that is needed to implement a reporting solution is hard work and takes a lot of code, the amount of work needed to generate a PDF or even a flash paper is hard work in php, or what about RIA development (Rich Internet Application's) that con leverage of flash to make presentation look good with minimal work. This functionality can and does save more work than you could ever possibly achieve in php, RAD development because it creates less work to achieve something that would take a lot of work and time in php. Don't get me started on the integration of crystal reports and php, I have had to do it and it was not easy compared to the same job in coldfusion. A good developer will know when to use the right tools for the job. Again, for future reference please state specifically what functionality CF provides with regards to integration with Flash and PDF generation that makes it so much better than PHP for these tasks. Is this functionality built in to CF or are they addons? If they are addons what does it cost to add them on? For my 2p-worth I have to say that I am yet to come across a requirement that PHP cannot fulfil either through built-in functionality or freely-available addons. However, if I'm lacking knowledge of the killer feature CF has to offer please enlighten me. Incidentally, if I have a requirement for a CPU-intensive function that does not already exist in CF, what options are there for adding it myself? Can I write code in C/C++ that integrates tightly with the CF engine so I can optimize the crap out of it? Thanks in advance for your responses. -Stut -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
On 6/30/05, Andrew Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Cons for PHP: > - > Coldfusion is also free (Blue Dragon) and has just as much support as PHP, > although. PHP can not run in a J2EE environment, limiting it to small scall > websites and limiting the prospect of expansion or server migration. I'm wondering if you could expand on this some. How does not running in a J2EE environment limit PHPs ability to expand? In my opinion this is not the case, but I'm always open to being convinced otherwise. I'm also curious what you mean by small scale. - Brad -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
RE: Re[2]: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
[snip] Would you develop in a language that you know could not deliver an enterprise solution if in 6 months that's what you really need, and how would you look if you recommended a language because it was free, but in time had to spend more again to make it fully scalable to an enterprise level if it needed it. [/snip] I know that I am not the only one, but we have been developing enterprise level (and very scalable) applications in PHP for almost 4 years. If you are asserting that PHP is not enterprise ready here you would be way off base. Here is another side which seems to have been ignored. I can bring C or C++ or JAVA developers in and have them up to speed in PHP very quickly. CF requires an additional learning curve (I used it way back in 1997 when it was in its earlier iterations) because of the tags, etc. -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: Re[2]: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
Hi Concerning php and J2EE, zend platform is providing a solid bridge between both environment. This as been specially build for developping big system (banking, tracking, etc). regards david Le Thu, 30 Jun 2005 13:06:22 +0200, Richard Davey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a écrit: Hello Andrew, Thursday, June 30, 2005, 9:15:22 AM, you wrote: AS> Coldfusion is also free (Blue Dragon) and has just as much support AS> as PHP, although. PHP can not run in a J2EE environment, limiting AS> it to small scall websites and limiting the prospect of expansion AS> or server migration. You like to tout CF as being J2EE/Enterprise ready. For this the free version of Blue Dragon is NOT suitable, by the developers own admission. You need the $6000 Enterprise version of CF (and you can add on a few more thousand $ for extended support). This is before you've bought any of the extra components you need to finish your application. 1) Blue Dragon is also not just a "free" version of CF it would appear, even on the developers web site they describe the free version as "Functionality is robust and useful for most basic CFML applications." - it's the words "most basic" that concern me here. 2) It doesn't support the newer CF 7 features. 3) The free version does not deploy into J2EE at all. 4) It only runs on Windows, OS X or Linux (sorry, but lots of very big hosting companies prefer the stability of FreeBSD, Solaris, etc). If you want Solaris support it costs $2499 per CPU. If you want FreeBSD support, you're stuffed. 5) It only supports ODBC database connections (via JDBC), so unlike PHP you won't be connecting to Oracle, MS SQL, SQLite, etc. MySQL is supported, but not built-in. If you want to do CF seriously, you need to invest thousands and that's before you've paid your programmers - this is the bottom line. Perhaps that is why even the Blue Dragon developers themselves claim its biggest advantage is: "You've invested heavily in CFML.. so have we. Protect your investments." - and how do you protect them? by deploying Blue Dragon so you can then interface directly with .NET applications rather than migrate totally to them. This doesn't strike me as being the approach of a growing, competitive well supported language. It sounds more like "shit, people have woken up to the massive cost of using CF, how can we slow the drop-out rate?" if that is Blue Dragons primary selling angle, it says a *lot* about the state of serious CF development. When it comes to investing it think long-term. Zend are aggressively attacking the enterprise market and we will see more and more movement in this direction, to the point where I am quite sure their objective is to make PHP itself enterprise capable *regardless* of J2EE. With the rate things change around here, we won't have to wait too long. If you don't actually need to build an enterprise scale site (and let's face it, that covers most of us) then you're good to go with PHP *right now* without actually spending a dime. Take that $6000 CF budget, invest it into training for your entire team and build your own framework, with the knowledge that no matter what happens, your work is safe. Anyway, time to get back to my project for BMW - just one of those "small scall websites" (sic) things I guess? Best regards, Richard Davey -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
RE: Re[2]: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
Richard, And your point of before you pay your programmer is what one of my other points was. CF is very rapid development, and you might say the same about PHP. The point is that these are all the things you need to take into consideration, the cost that it would take to develop and maintain in either language, as well as cost involved in the need of the application having to be a true enterprise solution. I am not here to bag php, I am here to make some points about the cost of the application in the overall scenario. Would you develop in a language that you know could not deliver an enterprise solution if in 6 months that's what you really need, and how would you look if you recommended a language because it was free, but in time had to spend more again to make it fully scalable to an enterprise level if it needed it. My point is that both languages have their merits, both have their advantages and disadvantages, but what about the cost is it really worth not researching something properly before jumping into bed with what you think might work? I know what I would do if someone who worked for me, came to me an recommended a language and had not done the research into all possible paths, that person would be very answerable to why we had to spend more down the track. Now that you have bagged CF, lets look at PHP. The amount of work that is needed to implement a reporting solution is hard work and takes a lot of code, the amount of work needed to generate a PDF or even a flash paper is hard work in php, or what about RIA development (Rich Internet Application's) that con leverage of flash to make presentation look good with minimal work. This functionality can and does save more work than you could ever possibly achieve in php, RAD development because it creates less work to achieve something that would take a lot of work and time in php. Don't get me started on the integration of crystal reports and php, I have had to do it and it was not easy compared to the same job in coldfusion. A good developer will know when to use the right tools for the job. -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re[2]: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
Hello Andrew, Thursday, June 30, 2005, 9:15:22 AM, you wrote: AS> Coldfusion is also free (Blue Dragon) and has just as much support AS> as PHP, although. PHP can not run in a J2EE environment, limiting AS> it to small scall websites and limiting the prospect of expansion AS> or server migration. You like to tout CF as being J2EE/Enterprise ready. For this the free version of Blue Dragon is NOT suitable, by the developers own admission. You need the $6000 Enterprise version of CF (and you can add on a few more thousand $ for extended support). This is before you've bought any of the extra components you need to finish your application. 1) Blue Dragon is also not just a "free" version of CF it would appear, even on the developers web site they describe the free version as "Functionality is robust and useful for most basic CFML applications." - it's the words "most basic" that concern me here. 2) It doesn't support the newer CF 7 features. 3) The free version does not deploy into J2EE at all. 4) It only runs on Windows, OS X or Linux (sorry, but lots of very big hosting companies prefer the stability of FreeBSD, Solaris, etc). If you want Solaris support it costs $2499 per CPU. If you want FreeBSD support, you're stuffed. 5) It only supports ODBC database connections (via JDBC), so unlike PHP you won't be connecting to Oracle, MS SQL, SQLite, etc. MySQL is supported, but not built-in. If you want to do CF seriously, you need to invest thousands and that's before you've paid your programmers - this is the bottom line. Perhaps that is why even the Blue Dragon developers themselves claim its biggest advantage is: "You've invested heavily in CFML.. so have we. Protect your investments." - and how do you protect them? by deploying Blue Dragon so you can then interface directly with .NET applications rather than migrate totally to them. This doesn't strike me as being the approach of a growing, competitive well supported language. It sounds more like "shit, people have woken up to the massive cost of using CF, how can we slow the drop-out rate?" if that is Blue Dragons primary selling angle, it says a *lot* about the state of serious CF development. When it comes to investing it think long-term. Zend are aggressively attacking the enterprise market and we will see more and more movement in this direction, to the point where I am quite sure their objective is to make PHP itself enterprise capable *regardless* of J2EE. With the rate things change around here, we won't have to wait too long. If you don't actually need to build an enterprise scale site (and let's face it, that covers most of us) then you're good to go with PHP *right now* without actually spending a dime. Take that $6000 CF budget, invest it into training for your entire team and build your own framework, with the knowledge that no matter what happens, your work is safe. Anyway, time to get back to my project for BMW - just one of those "small scall websites" (sic) things I guess? Best regards, Richard Davey -- http://www.launchcode.co.uk - PHP Development Services "I do not fear computers. I fear the lack of them." - Isaac Asimov -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
RE: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
Actually Richard that is not what I am trying to do. This guy actually is after some feedback and that's what I am trying to give him. Pros for PHP: - It is free, and takes more time to learn that coldfusion (debatable yes). It has a huge support from other developers, and is usually more than free. Cons for PHP: - Coldfusion is also free (Blue Dragon) and has just as much support as PHP, although. PHP can not run in a J2EE environment, limiting it to small scall websites and limiting the prospect of expansion or server migration. I could go on, but as I said at the end of the day it's up to the original poster to put forward the pros and cons to both languages. If I was him I would look at this objectively, because it would bite him in the butt if he made the wrong choice and had to spend more money because the application was not researched for its needs and future expansion path correctly. I would not want to be in a position where I chose one or the other without giving all the information of pros and cons, this allows for the powers to be to make the wrong choice and not the person asking about this in the first place. This is the advice that I am trying to put forward, not whether this language is better than that, but more of an open mind to what each can and can't do. Regards Andrew Scott Analyst Programmer CMS Transport Systems Level 2/33 Bank Street South Melbourne, Victoria, 3205 Phone: 03 9699 7988 - Fax: 03 9699 7976 -Original Message- From: Richard Lynch [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, 30 June 2005 5:54 PM To: Andrew Scott Cc: 'Rick Emery'; php-general@lists.php.net Subject: RE: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion If you like CF and want to use it, more power to you. But you really are wasting your time telling us it's got more features than PHP, which is patently false. -- Like Music? http://l-i-e.com/artists.htm -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
RE: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
On Wed, June 29, 2005 9:24 am, Andrew Scott said: > At the end of the day you, the guy around the corner and even me will use > what we need to use to get the job done. Don't get me wrong I like php, it > has a good support for free stuff, but it's a pain in the butt to > configure > it into a full blown application without modifications, which some > languages > have built in. Oddly enough, I prefer PHP because it *HAS* all the features ColdFusion only has if you pay through the nose to Allaire (or whomever owns it this week) or pay through the nose for custom tags to 20 different guys who each have one of the features you need or... In fact, does CF have *any* feature, at any price, that PHP doesn't? I think not. I also *HATE* the muddled-up mess of CF tags, though that is obviously a more subjective opinion. If you like CF and want to use it, more power to you. But you really are wasting your time telling us it's got more features than PHP, which is patently false. -- Like Music? http://l-i-e.com/artists.htm -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
RE: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
On Wed, 2005-06-29 at 12:24, Andrew Scott wrote: > Rick, > > Yes a framework can be built in PHP, C# or any language but how would you > like to design something like this. > > > > > > > Blah blah blah, InterJinn can do this, as I'm sure quite a few other PHP frameworks can. Cheers, Rob. -- .. | InterJinn Application Framework - http://www.interjinn.com | :: | An application and templating framework for PHP. Boasting | | a powerful, scalable system for accessing system services | | such as forms, properties, sessions, and caches. InterJinn | | also provides an extremely flexible architecture for | | creating re-usable components quickly and easily. | `' -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re[2]: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
Hello Andrew, Wednesday, June 29, 2005, 5:24:50 PM, you wrote: AS> AS> AS> AS> AS> AS> AS> The above is tags that I am referring to very similar to java tag libraries, AS> these tags read data from a database, validate and display the data like AS> windows .net forms in a webpage. Yes the framework took a little time to AS> develop, but it was worth the time invested. Now this same framework even AS> decides whether it is updating inserting or deleting from the database as AS> well as server / client side validation. Very nice, a lot of hard work has obviously gone into the creation of this. Are your CF tags are being inserted into standard HTML documents? What kind of template system do you have in this framework to separate business logic from display logic? What happens if for example one of your tags needed to fetch data from a remote site via SOAP, would you then have to create yet another tag, or add an extra attribute to it? AS> But the thing is PHP can not be delivered onto a J2EE server, AS> coldfusion can http://www.zend.com/store/products/zend-platform/java.php AS> it worth going with something free, or could I leverage of the sms AS> gateway to utilise sms messaging, or even use the report tools AS> built into coldfusion to deliver invoices without too much effort. AS> Or maybe you have data in a database and need to create a pdf, AS> with a simple tag this can be achieved as it is built in. What happens when your built-in PDF component fails to have a feature a client requests? I'm not trying to start an argument btw, I'm asking a question. Most seasoned PHP developers I know already have a wide arsenal of functions and objects at their disposal that can do what you've listed - if they wished to assign this functionality to a "single tag" in their template, well.. that's their choice I guess. Not everyone works around that paradigm though. Best regards, Richard Davey -- http://www.launchcode.co.uk - PHP Development Services "I do not fear computers. I fear the lack of them." - Isaac Asimov -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
RE: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
Rick, Yes a framework can be built in PHP, C# or any language but how would you like to design something like this. The above is tags that I am referring to very similar to java tag libraries, these tags read data from a database, validate and display the data like windows .net forms in a webpage. Yes the framework took a little time to develop, but it was worth the time invested. Now this same framework even decides whether it is updating inserting or deleting from the database as well as server / client side validation. Seems to be a lot of work for such a few lines of code, the beauty is that I have not been able to replicated the same in any other language whether it be php, perl or even c#. I could even do this. and use it like this Now the above tag can be either coldfusion or even java tag libraries building on even more free code that is out in the public domain. Anyway the point is that open and closing tags do offer a lot of benefits if you know how to use them, think of the code that the browser does to do things like coldfusion is the same and makes building rapid sites very rapid. I am not out to push coldfusion, I am just wanting to say that Coldfusion can be used free of charge with New Atlanta's Blue Dragon. Why are you held bent on saying you need to purchase coldfusion? But the thing is PHP can not be delivered onto a J2EE server, coldfusion can and that is the biggest seller to coldfusion meaning it becomes more deployable than any other language out there across all platforms without even installing coldfusion on that machine. PHP is not J2EE and can not be deployed onto a J2EE server without installing php on that machine, and then installing the application, another big selling point of coldfusion. Anyway there are always pros and cons to any language, and yes I am biased towards Coldfusion because it's so underrated by the fact it costs. Well it can be used installed and used free again New Atlanta has seen to this with Blue Dragon, but again to use the must have features you need to purchase the product to get the features you might use. Which you need to way up, is it worth going with something free, or could I leverage of the sms gateway to utilise sms messaging, or even use the report tools built into coldfusion to deliver invoices without too much effort. Or maybe you have data in a database and need to create a pdf, with a simple tag this can be achieved as it is built in. PHP would need to source this, time spent evaluating and then deciding whether it mets the needs, no then look again, more time waisted. If it was me, I would be looking at what the project requires, which language can be used to deliver the project on time on budget and without purchasing or sourcing too much extra code and then trying to get it to fit into that application. Coldfusion offers more than you think with coldfusion 7 offering sms gateways and such which you need extra applications to use in php. At the end of the day you, the guy around the corner and even me will use what we need to use to get the job done. Don't get me wrong I like php, it has a good support for free stuff, but it's a pain in the butt to configure it into a full blown application without modifications, which some languages have built in. -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
Rick Emery wrote: (this is just a personal opinion, so please, nobody get huffy). *gets all huffy* -- John C. Nichel ÜberGeek KegWorks.com 716.856.9675 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
I normally don't top-post, but think I can get away with it just this once, because I only wanted to say... Well said. Thanks, Rick Quoting Matthew Weier O'Phinney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: * "Andrew Scott" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: I have been a coldfusion developer for now 10 years almost, and can code anything you want in a very short time. Have been learning PHP for now 6 months and I am sorry to say that I don't like PHP over coldfusion. Now the problem is that with any language that you choose to develop in, it all boils down to maintenance costs. Sure PHP might be free, but lets look at the realistic world of development. First off, I work in the real world, too. I have been a web developer for many years. I've worked in perl, ASP, Tango, and PHP on the server side. Your idea of the "realistic world of development" differs from mine -- and yet we're both web developers. Neither one of us is 100% correct. What I'm going to write below comes from my own experience and is my opinion, and it's no less valid than yours. You insinuate with your last sentence above that PHP costs more to maintain, either in time, money, or both. In my experience, I've found languages that do not require either (a) a dedicated IDE and/or (b) a GUI IDE easier and less costly to maintain. The reasoning is that I can use a terminal to the server in order to make changes on the fly, and also that I can use standard tools like ssh, ftp, etc. to upload updates -- all of which are standard on the boxes on which I work, and which are accessible from anywhere with an internet connection. Coldfusion allows very RAD and is very code reuse friendly PHP is a RAD environment. That's how it's been developed, and that's how it remains. It's a language suited for getting web pages up, fast. PHP can also be very 'code reuse friendly'. It simply depends on the developer. If you use OOP wisely, it's very easy to create frameworks that can inherit from each other. I've done things such as create a gallery class, which I've then extended into an e-cards application. I also tend to write code once, and use 'instance scripts' that set up the environment -- which allows me to re-use the same application in different areas of a site or on different sites, and have each instance feel unique. and is not dead in the water, and keeps getting stronger and stronger. With coldfusion you have the ability to leverage of java more than you care to think, and even a simple command like String = WhatThe.Size(); Will work, and the method size is not a part of coldfusion but a part of java, and makes the code just as easy to use than ever before. With the ability of tags we have created a framework in coldfusion that allows us to create a master / detail page in around 2 minutes, we can't do this in php without spending a minimum of 4 hours to do the same job. But how much time have you poured into that framework? I'm willing to bet that if you had spent a similar amount of time developing a PHP framework, you'd have the same end result. This is not a matter of the language, it's a matter of familiarity with tools and time spent refining them. But lets look at the bigger picture for a minute, php might be free but look at the amount of time it would take to develop and application, then look at coldfusion and it might cost but its quicker to develop with the right person and could end up saving you time and money in the future. That last statement, "its[sic] quicker to develop with the right person" is the key statement here. I think you'll find that, with any language, if you have a well-trained professional doing the development, you're going to get faster, more accurate results. (Caveat: so long as the language is actually suited to the task at hand. Don't use C++ to develop web apps, and don't use PHP to develop system drivers.) Now I have read that people have talked about server loads, if the coldfusion application is installed correctly in the first place then it would not be an issue that's why there is an enterprise version. Server loads are going to vary based on the efficiency of the application, the application server (if any), the RDBMS (if any), and the web server. All of these areas can be tuned. This is true of LAMP, true of ASP.NET, and true of ColdFusion. We develop intranet applications that deliver sales invoicing, and financial report writing with pdf invoices / picking slips and this is now included in coldfusion although we use it with CR9/10, but to have this feature in a php application its too much of a headache to program (time wise). I'll go on a limb here and say that the reason it's too much of a headache is that you're more familiar with ColdFusion, and less familiar with PHP. These things are not hard in PHP, and a number of libraries make PDF creation very easy. But you're already familiar with how to do this in ColdFusion, so that's going to be easier. Most powers to be will be looking at the overal
RE: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
Quoting Andrew Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: I have been a coldfusion developer for now 10 years almost, and can code anything you want in a very short time. Have been learning PHP for now 6 months and I am sorry to say that I don't like PHP over coldfusion. Im always glad to get input from the ColdFusion side. Now the problem is that with any language that you choose to develop in, it all boils down to maintenance costs. Sure PHP might be free, but lets look at the realistic world of development. Well, okay, but I think PHP is being used in the "realistic world of development". Still, I want to be objective... Coldfusion allows very RAD and is very code reuse friendly and is not dead in the water, and keeps getting stronger and stronger. With coldfusion you have the ability to leverage of java more than you care to think, and even a simple command like String = WhatThe.Size(); Will work, and the method size is not a part of coldfusion but a part of java, and makes the code just as easy to use than ever before. With the ability of tags we have created a framework in coldfusion that allows us to create a master / detail page in around 2 minutes, we can't do this in php without spending a minimum of 4 hours to do the same job. Okay, but a framework can be built with PHP as well. You seem to brag on ColdFusion because it leverages Java; why would I not also consider J2EE then, developing directly in Java and removing the abstraction layer of ColdFusion? You also mention ColdFusion tags...this is one of my biggest peeves. I have a programming background, and the tags in ColdFusion make me feel like I'm writing HTML, not code (this is just a personal opinion, so please, nobody get huffy). That's why PHP feels more comfortable to me, but that's just a personal preference. You mention that you can do a job in two minutes with ColdFusion that would take four hours in PHP. I have two issues with this statement: 1. By your own admission, you're using a framework you've created to do the ColdFusion job, while I have to assume that the PHP job is from scratch. If you wrote and used a similar framework for PHP, would that job not also take much less time? 2. I wrote a "proof-of-concept" application in PHP. For comparison, I re-wrote the same application in ColdFusion. It took me much longer to provide the same functionality with ColdFusion than it did with PHP. But I can be objective; the fact is that I'm much more familiar with PHP than ColdFusion, which directly contributed to the time it took to do each app. Now the thing is no matter were you go you will get that this is better than that, and in this case I do like php, but I enjoy and can get things done quicker in coldfusion. I am only here because I have to maintain some php code. What I'm looking for is *why* people think "this is better than that". I think I've already handled the "getting things done quicker" portion from my point of view, but am glad to have your input. But lets look at the bigger picture for a minute, php might be free but look at the amount of time it would take to develop and application, then look at coldfusion and it might cost but its quicker to develop with the right person and could end up saving you time and money in the future. "...with the right person" being the operative phrase :-) And my feeling is that faster isn't always better. We've done some very complex applications using Visual Basic, making it do things Microsoft never intended in the name of RAD. We've been bitten by that and have learned that developing faster isn't always better. *Personally*, I don't care for environments that do things for me "under the covers"; but I'm a control freak and that's my C/C++ background coming through. I love the fact that people have written PHP libraries, but that I can view and modify the source code if I want. But I'm objective enough to realize that this is only my opinion and may not be best for our organization. Now I have read that people have talked about server loads, if the coldfusion application is installed correctly in the first place then it would not be an issue that's why there is an enterprise version. We downloaded a demo version of ColdFusion and three of us tried to install it. Only one was successful. Obviously two of us failed because we aren't familiar with it and did something wrong; but I was able to successfully install PHP on three different servers (two Windows, one Linux). To run ColdFusion, I would have to learn to install and configure it correctly; this would have to be factored into my time to develop with it. We develop intranet applications that deliver sales invoicing, and financial report writing with pdf invoices / picking slips and this is now included in coldfusion although we use it with CR9/10, but to have this feature in a php application its too much of a headache to program (time wise). Most powers to be will be look
Re: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
* "Andrew Scott" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > I have been a coldfusion developer for now 10 years almost, and can > code anything you want in a very short time. Have been learning PHP > for now 6 months and I am sorry to say that I don't like PHP over > coldfusion. > > Now the problem is that with any language that you choose to develop > in, it all boils down to maintenance costs. Sure PHP might be free, > but lets look at the realistic world of development. First off, I work in the real world, too. I have been a web developer for many years. I've worked in perl, ASP, Tango, and PHP on the server side. Your idea of the "realistic world of development" differs from mine -- and yet we're both web developers. Neither one of us is 100% correct. What I'm going to write below comes from my own experience and is my opinion, and it's no less valid than yours. You insinuate with your last sentence above that PHP costs more to maintain, either in time, money, or both. In my experience, I've found languages that do not require either (a) a dedicated IDE and/or (b) a GUI IDE easier and less costly to maintain. The reasoning is that I can use a terminal to the server in order to make changes on the fly, and also that I can use standard tools like ssh, ftp, etc. to upload updates -- all of which are standard on the boxes on which I work, and which are accessible from anywhere with an internet connection. > Coldfusion allows very RAD and is very code reuse friendly PHP is a RAD environment. That's how it's been developed, and that's how it remains. It's a language suited for getting web pages up, fast. PHP can also be very 'code reuse friendly'. It simply depends on the developer. If you use OOP wisely, it's very easy to create frameworks that can inherit from each other. I've done things such as create a gallery class, which I've then extended into an e-cards application. I also tend to write code once, and use 'instance scripts' that set up the environment -- which allows me to re-use the same application in different areas of a site or on different sites, and have each instance feel unique. > and is not dead in the water, and keeps getting stronger and stronger. > With coldfusion you have the ability to leverage of java more than you > care to think, and even a simple command like > > String = WhatThe.Size(); > > Will work, and the method size is not a part of coldfusion but a part > of java, and makes the code just as easy to use than ever before. With > the ability of tags we have created a framework in coldfusion that > allows us to create a master / detail page in around 2 minutes, we > can't do this in php without spending a minimum of 4 hours to do the > same job. But how much time have you poured into that framework? I'm willing to bet that if you had spent a similar amount of time developing a PHP framework, you'd have the same end result. This is not a matter of the language, it's a matter of familiarity with tools and time spent refining them. > But lets look at the bigger picture for a minute, php might be free > but look at the amount of time it would take to develop and > application, then look at coldfusion and it might cost but its quicker > to develop with the right person and could end up saving you time and > money in the future. That last statement, "its[sic] quicker to develop with the right person" is the key statement here. I think you'll find that, with any language, if you have a well-trained professional doing the development, you're going to get faster, more accurate results. (Caveat: so long as the language is actually suited to the task at hand. Don't use C++ to develop web apps, and don't use PHP to develop system drivers.) > Now I have read that people have talked about server loads, if the > coldfusion application is installed correctly in the first place then > it would not be an issue that's why there is an enterprise version. Server loads are going to vary based on the efficiency of the application, the application server (if any), the RDBMS (if any), and the web server. All of these areas can be tuned. This is true of LAMP, true of ASP.NET, and true of ColdFusion. > We develop intranet applications that deliver sales invoicing, and > financial report writing with pdf invoices / picking slips and this is > now included in coldfusion although we use it with CR9/10, but to have > this feature in a php application its too much of a headache to > program (time wise). I'll go on a limb here and say that the reason it's too much of a headache is that you're more familiar with ColdFusion, and less familiar with PHP. These things are not hard in PHP, and a number of libraries make PDF creation very easy. But you're already familiar with how to do this in ColdFusion, so that's going to be easier. > Most powers to be will be looking at the overall cost, development > cost and maintenance cost and this can be very expensive, if you don't > do your homework first, and with blue drag
RE: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
I have been a coldfusion developer for now 10 years almost, and can code anything you want in a very short time. Have been learning PHP for now 6 months and I am sorry to say that I don't like PHP over coldfusion. Now the problem is that with any language that you choose to develop in, it all boils down to maintenance costs. Sure PHP might be free, but lets look at the realistic world of development. Coldfusion allows very RAD and is very code reuse friendly and is not dead in the water, and keeps getting stronger and stronger. With coldfusion you have the ability to leverage of java more than you care to think, and even a simple command like String = WhatThe.Size(); Will work, and the method size is not a part of coldfusion but a part of java, and makes the code just as easy to use than ever before. With the ability of tags we have created a framework in coldfusion that allows us to create a master / detail page in around 2 minutes, we can't do this in php without spending a minimum of 4 hours to do the same job. Now the thing is no matter were you go you will get that this is better than that, and in this case I do like php, but I enjoy and can get things done quicker in coldfusion. I am only here because I have to maintain some php code. But lets look at the bigger picture for a minute, php might be free but look at the amount of time it would take to develop and application, then look at coldfusion and it might cost but its quicker to develop with the right person and could end up saving you time and money in the future. Now I have read that people have talked about server loads, if the coldfusion application is installed correctly in the first place then it would not be an issue that's why there is an enterprise version. We develop intranet applications that deliver sales invoicing, and financial report writing with pdf invoices / picking slips and this is now included in coldfusion although we use it with CR9/10, but to have this feature in a php application its too much of a headache to program (time wise). Most powers to be will be looking at the overall cost, development cost and maintenance cost and this can be very expensive, if you don't do your homework first, and with blue dragon you don't need to spend a cent to develop in coldfusion. Regards Andrew Scott Analyst Programmer CMS Transport Systems Level 2/33 Bank Street South Melbourne, Victoria, 3205 Phone: 03 9699 7988 - Fax: 03 9699 7976 -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
RE: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
Quoting Matt Babineau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Yeah -> I'll second all of this. I'm a Certified Macromedia CF Developer, why do you ask am I on this list? The answer is simple, php is better. However with the recent developments in CF6, CF has become very comparable. Why would I still choose PHP over CF given this? Ease of management. I don't have to even think about the server. I spend about 1 hr a month messing around with the server (daemon restarts or php config changes). That's where LAMP's value really shines through I think you will find. I really appreciate having an opinion from a ColdFusion developer. Thanks! Rick -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
Quoting Brad Pauly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: It might not be easy to put a number on, but consider your (and possibly the other developers') enthusiasm about PHP. I would guess that you will be more productive with something that you are excited about. Our senior developer and I (who come from a C background) are big php fans, and have made that fact clear to management. We have a new developer whose background is in ColdFusion, but he's been playing with and has warmed to php; he says he likes it and would look forward to the challenge of a new language. We have a Visual Basic programmer who I thought would push for ColdFusion but, to my surprise, he's pushing for php (maybe just because he's following everybody else, but I don't really care why). Our last developer hasn't expressed an opinion one way or the other. Our manager, who will ultimately make the decision, has seen some ColdFusion demos and really likes the ease of use (through abstraction of common tasks) and RAD capabilities. To my knowledge, she hasn't looked at php yet (which is why I'm soliciting information). I have done a lot of work in both ColdFusion and PHP and I much prefer PHP. There are some technical reasons (i.e., I like "shared nothing"), but some of it is also personal preference. I just like it. CF is fine and I don't think it's dead, but it just isn't as fun to work with. My biggest problem with CF is probably that I have to use it on Windows and, well, I really don't like that. ;) You mention being in a Windows environment so maybe you don't have a choice with that aspect. Good information; I really appreciate having opinions from ColdFusion developers. As far as the Windows environment, things may be on the way to changing; see my earlier post about a current php application running on a Linux box with Apache. If management can see that you are stoked to use PHP that might help your cause. That's what I'm hoping, and so far it seems to be having an impact. Thanks for your input! Rick -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
Quoting Jonathan Villa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Take a look at these, they are just some of the articles I've bookmarked over the past Oracle is now behind (well in support of) PHP http://www.oracle.com/technology/tech/php/index.html IBM is also behind PHP (well in support of) http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks/websphere/techjournal/0505_krook/0505_krook.html http://www-306.ibm.com/software/data/info/zendcore/pr.html Microsoft looks to extenguish LAMP http://news.com.com/Microsoft+looks+to+extinguish +LAMP/2100-1012_3-5746549.html Misc: http://www.robertpeake.com/archives/66-Why-PHP.html http://news.com.com/2061-10795_3-5663085.html To be fair: http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/software/0,261733,39193420,00.htm If you're org decides to go PHP... there are all kinds of OpenSource tools they can choose use which they can enhance for their organization's specific needs GForge Mambo CMS SugarCRM and more... GForge and SugarCRM also have paid support options as well. -Jonathan Villa Thanks for the info! Rick -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
Quoting Jochem Maas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: what is special about the MSSQL2K servers? do you have a lot of stored procedures in it? stuff like that? Exactly; the past mentality has been "do everything through stored procedures", so we have a *lot*. Also, my manager's boss (who has since retired) had a very Microsoft-centric outlook. My manager is gradually overcoming that, but everything we do is data collection, storage, and retrieval, so MSSQL2K is pretty entrenched in the organization. if the MSSQL servers are so important/complex/big/etc then maybe ASP.not is the right way to go? given that moving 'everything' from client-server to web-baseed interfaces isn't really a short-term operation. (assuming some level of complexity in the existing software.) Good point. But ASP.Net is definitely out (even my Microsoft-centric manager wants to stay away from the Framework for now). Only new applications and smaller existing utilities will be done web-based, with an eye on porting existing applications gradually at some later time as our schedule permits. And you hit the nail right on the head; our existing apps are very complex (heavy COM+, MSMQ, and some of those other nasty bits :-); those won't even be considered for some time. A funny thing about this; I wrote a php application as a proof-of-concept (to show that it would work for us). The big-wigs in the organization fell in love with the app, and it was placed into production. It was initially placed on a W2K server with IIS 5, but we had some problems. It was moved to a W2K3 server with IIS 6, and the problem remained. I moved the app to a Linux server (well, it's really just a PC) with Apache2, and it's run for a few weeks without any problems. I think my manager's new boss wants to use this success to use a production Linux server (which would be our first) to host our web apps. like marcromedia tools are required to run CF, they 'tie you in' to the technology. buying Zend products is optional, if the Zend IDE is judge to be a moneysaving tool for working with PHP then you buy it. But you don't have to. the essential tools are with out cost and open to inspection and modification. Purchasing Zend Accelerator/Encoder maybe a good move for you company but again its not a requirement. Absolutely. As I mentioned in an earlier post, I'm used to developing through ssh with vi :-) Any code we write would have to run on a server without any Zend products, but those of us who have evaluated them believe there is enough added value in some of the Zend products to consider them. from a strategic point of view it might also not be wise to make a substanstial investment in technology from a company thats just been bought out by the competion (adobe)? That will definitely be discussed; I read an article the other day that the acquisition has now put Adobe/Macromedia in Microsoft's cross-hairs. Of course, I also read an article that Microsoft is trying to extinguish LAMP, but I actually chuckled when I read that one. Thanks for your input! Rick -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
RE: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
Yeah -> I'll second all of this. I'm a Certified Macromedia CF Developer, why do you ask am I on this list? The answer is simple, php is better. However with the recent developments in CF6, CF has become very comparable. Why would I still choose PHP over CF given this? Ease of management. I don't have to even think about the server. I spend about 1 hr a month messing around with the server (daemon restarts or php config changes). That's where LAMP's value really shines through I think you will find. Thanks, Matt Babineau Criticalcode 858.733.0160 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.criticalcode.com -Original Message- From: Brad Pauly [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, June 27, 2005 11:09 AM To: php-general@lists.php.net Subject: Re: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion On 6/26/05, Rick Emery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > My employer has (finally) decided to take full advantage of our > intranet, and wants to move from client-server applications to > web-based applications. To that end, we're trying to determine the > best platform for our applications. We're a Microsoft shop, with > Microsoft SQL Server 2000 for all of our databases (that won't change > any time soon, if ever). Due to past experience that I won't get into, > we (the Development group) have all agreed that ASP.Net is out (at > least for the short term). > > We had the opportunity to visit a local enterprise that has deployed > ColdFusion, and they couldn't stop singing its praises. I'm partial to > PHP, even after sampling Coldfusion, so what I would like is some > "ammunition" that I can take into a meeting to "sell" management on > PHP instead of ColdFusion. I've already been harping on the difference > in cost, so I'm looking for other points to go with. Besides, we'll > probably invest in Zend products if we choose PHP, and Macromedia has > government rates available; I don't have any numbers (yet), but the > cost difference may not be that great in the end. > > Any input would be greatly appreciated. Opinions are welcome > (especially from programmers with experience in both), but I have to > "sell" it to management (I'm already on the PHP side), so links to > data or articles comparing the two are best. It might not be easy to put a number on, but consider your (and possibly the other developers') enthusiasm about PHP. I would guess that you will be more productive with something that you are excited about. I have done a lot of work in both ColdFusion and PHP and I much prefer PHP. There are some technical reasons (i.e., I like "shared nothing"), but some of it is also personal preference. I just like it. CF is fine and I don't think it's dead, but it just isn't as fun to work with. My biggest problem with CF is probably that I have to use it on Windows and, well, I really don't like that. ;) You mention being in a Windows environment so maybe you don't have a choice with that aspect. If management can see that you are stoked to use PHP that might help your cause. - Brad -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
On 6/26/05, Rick Emery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > My employer has (finally) decided to take full advantage of our > intranet, and wants to move from client-server applications to > web-based applications. To that end, we're trying to determine the best > platform for our applications. We're a Microsoft shop, with Microsoft > SQL Server 2000 for all of our databases (that won't change any time > soon, if ever). Due to past experience that I won't get into, we (the > Development group) have all agreed that ASP.Net is out (at least for > the short term). > > We had the opportunity to visit a local enterprise that has deployed > ColdFusion, and they couldn't stop singing its praises. I'm partial to > PHP, even after sampling Coldfusion, so what I would like is some > "ammunition" that I can take into a meeting to "sell" management on PHP > instead of ColdFusion. I've already been harping on the difference in > cost, so I'm looking for other points to go with. Besides, we'll > probably invest in Zend products if we choose PHP, and Macromedia has > government rates available; I don't have any numbers (yet), but the > cost difference may not be that great in the end. > > Any input would be greatly appreciated. Opinions are welcome > (especially from programmers with experience in both), but I have to > "sell" it to management (I'm already on the PHP side), so links to data > or articles comparing the two are best. It might not be easy to put a number on, but consider your (and possibly the other developers') enthusiasm about PHP. I would guess that you will be more productive with something that you are excited about. I have done a lot of work in both ColdFusion and PHP and I much prefer PHP. There are some technical reasons (i.e., I like "shared nothing"), but some of it is also personal preference. I just like it. CF is fine and I don't think it's dead, but it just isn't as fun to work with. My biggest problem with CF is probably that I have to use it on Windows and, well, I really don't like that. ;) You mention being in a Windows environment so maybe you don't have a choice with that aspect. If management can see that you are stoked to use PHP that might help your cause. - Brad -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
Take a look at these, they are just some of the articles I've bookmarked over the past Oracle is now behind (well in support of) PHP http://www.oracle.com/technology/tech/php/index.html IBM is also behind PHP (well in support of) http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks/websphere/techjournal/0505_krook/0505_krook.html http://www-306.ibm.com/software/data/info/zendcore/pr.html Microsoft looks to extenguish LAMP http://news.com.com/Microsoft+looks+to+extinguish +LAMP/2100-1012_3-5746549.html Misc: http://www.robertpeake.com/archives/66-Why-PHP.html http://news.com.com/2061-10795_3-5663085.html To be fair: http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/software/0,261733,39193420,00.htm If you're org decides to go PHP... there are all kinds of OpenSource tools they can choose use which they can enhance for their organization's specific needs GForge Mambo CMS SugarCRM and more... GForge and SugarCRM also have paid support options as well. -Jonathan Villa On Mon, 2005-06-27 at 00:14 +0200, Jochem Maas wrote: > Rick Emery wrote: > > My employer has (finally) decided to take full advantage of our > > intranet, and wants to move from client-server applications to web-based > > applications. To that end, we're trying to determine the best platform > > for our applications. We're a Microsoft shop, with Microsoft SQL Server > > 2000 for all of our databases (that won't change any time soon, if > > what is special about the MSSQL2K servers? do you have a lot of stored > procedures in it? stuff like that? > > > ever). Due to past experience that I won't get into, we (the Development > > group) have all agreed that ASP.Net is out (at least for the short term). > > > > if the MSSQL servers are so important/complex/big/etc then maybe ASP.not > is the right way to go? given that moving 'everything' from > client-server to web-baseed interfaces isn't really a short-term > operation. (assuming some level of complexity in the existing software.) > > > We had the opportunity to visit a local enterprise that has deployed > > ColdFusion, and they couldn't stop singing its praises. I'm partial to > > PHP, even after sampling Coldfusion, so what I would like is some > > "ammunition" that I can take into a meeting to "sell" management on PHP > > instead of ColdFusion. I've already been harping on the difference in > > cost, so I'm looking for other points to go with. Besides, we'll > > probably invest in Zend products if we choose PHP, and Macromedia has > > like marcromedia tools are required to run CF, they 'tie you in' to > the technology. buying Zend products is optional, if the Zend IDE is judge to > be a moneysaving tool for working with PHP then you buy it. But you > don't have to. the essential tools are with out cost and open to inspection > and modification. Purchasing Zend Accelerator/Encoder maybe a good move > for you company but again its not a requirement. > > from a strategic point of view it might also not be wise to make a > substanstial investment in technology from a company thats just been > bought out by the competion (adobe)? > > > government rates available; I don't have any numbers (yet), but the cost > > difference may not be that great in the end. > > > > Any input would be greatly appreciated. Opinions are welcome (especially > > from programmers with experience in both), but I have to "sell" it to > > management (I'm already on the PHP side), so links to data or articles > > comparing the two are best. > > > > Thanks in advance, > > Rick -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
Rick Emery wrote: My employer has (finally) decided to take full advantage of our intranet, and wants to move from client-server applications to web-based applications. To that end, we're trying to determine the best platform for our applications. We're a Microsoft shop, with Microsoft SQL Server 2000 for all of our databases (that won't change any time soon, if what is special about the MSSQL2K servers? do you have a lot of stored procedures in it? stuff like that? ever). Due to past experience that I won't get into, we (the Development group) have all agreed that ASP.Net is out (at least for the short term). if the MSSQL servers are so important/complex/big/etc then maybe ASP.not is the right way to go? given that moving 'everything' from client-server to web-baseed interfaces isn't really a short-term operation. (assuming some level of complexity in the existing software.) We had the opportunity to visit a local enterprise that has deployed ColdFusion, and they couldn't stop singing its praises. I'm partial to PHP, even after sampling Coldfusion, so what I would like is some "ammunition" that I can take into a meeting to "sell" management on PHP instead of ColdFusion. I've already been harping on the difference in cost, so I'm looking for other points to go with. Besides, we'll probably invest in Zend products if we choose PHP, and Macromedia has like marcromedia tools are required to run CF, they 'tie you in' to the technology. buying Zend products is optional, if the Zend IDE is judge to be a moneysaving tool for working with PHP then you buy it. But you don't have to. the essential tools are with out cost and open to inspection and modification. Purchasing Zend Accelerator/Encoder maybe a good move for you company but again its not a requirement. from a strategic point of view it might also not be wise to make a substanstial investment in technology from a company thats just been bought out by the competion (adobe)? government rates available; I don't have any numbers (yet), but the cost difference may not be that great in the end. Any input would be greatly appreciated. Opinions are welcome (especially from programmers with experience in both), but I have to "sell" it to management (I'm already on the PHP side), so links to data or articles comparing the two are best. Thanks in advance, Rick -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP] PHP vs. ColdFusion
My employer has (finally) decided to take full advantage of our intranet, and wants to move from client-server applications to web-based applications. To that end, we're trying to determine the best platform for our applications. We're a Microsoft shop, with Microsoft SQL Server 2000 for all of our databases (that won't change any time soon, if ever). Due to past experience that I won't get into, we (the Development group) have all agreed that ASP.Net is out (at least for the short term). We had the opportunity to visit a local enterprise that has deployed ColdFusion, and they couldn't stop singing its praises. I'm partial to PHP, even after sampling Coldfusion, so what I would like is some "ammunition" that I can take into a meeting to "sell" management on PHP instead of ColdFusion. I've already been harping on the difference in cost, so I'm looking for other points to go with. Besides, we'll probably invest in Zend products if we choose PHP, and Macromedia has government rates available; I don't have any numbers (yet), but the cost difference may not be that great in the end. Any input would be greatly appreciated. Opinions are welcome (especially from programmers with experience in both), but I have to "sell" it to management (I'm already on the PHP side), so links to data or articles comparing the two are best. Thanks in advance, Rick -- Rick Emery "When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the Earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there you will always long to return" -- Leonardo Da Vinci -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] PHP vs Coldfusion and ADO vd API
On Mon, 7 May 2001, Jeff wrote: > I have two questions: > > 1) I've seen a lot of benching by pc magazine and they're saying how > great cold fusion is and how bad php is. However, they don't use Zend > in any of their tests. Does anyone know of benchmarks against popular > systems that include php + Zend? Every PHP4 includes 'Zend' - it's the underlying engine that powers PHP. Did you mean the zend optimizer? the zend cache? The only thing an optimizer or cache would buy you is speed, which PHP is definitely not lacking compared with many other systems. The most recent 'shoot out' in memory is ZDNet's 'eweek' thing. They flat out print that PHP is the fastest in their benchmark, ASP being the second fastest (becoming the first after MS tweaked the benchmark and resubmmited optimized code). CF was third or fourth down. But they rated it highest because of purported ease of development (GUI editor, drag and drop queries, etc.) > > 2) What is the performance gain by using an API vs database abstraction > layers, like ADO? An any abstraction layer is going to add at least a small % to the overall processing time, because it's abstracting - having to do extra conversions that wouldn't be necessary hardcoding for one database. But you gain flexbility should you need to move datbases later on. > > Thanks, > > Jeff > > > -- > PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To contact the list administrators, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To contact the list administrators, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[PHP] PHP vs Coldfusion and ADO vd API
I have two questions: 1) I've seen a lot of benching by pc magazine and they're saying how great cold fusion is and how bad php is. However, they don't use Zend in any of their tests. Does anyone know of benchmarks against popular systems that include php + Zend? 2) What is the performance gain by using an API vs database abstraction layers, like ADO? Thanks, Jeff -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To contact the list administrators, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
