On 9 Jan 2010, at 03:32, Parijat Kalia wrote:
I like the DIY for a bug in open source vs a dead end to a bug in closed
source as a really solid example.
Can you give a more concrete example? yes, theoretically that's correct - but
in the PHP world, code isn't compiled.
If you've paid for
But you still have a chance with open source because the source is
available. With closed source, if the company decided to not continue
the product or not fix a bug, then that's the end of it.
Another advantage is the licensing. Most open source comes with
generic open source licensing that
On Sat, 9 Jan 2010, Lee Bolding wrote:
How many people saw the critical bugs with PHP 5.2.7, and rather than fix
them themselves, waited for the next release?
We build our own software from source, so yeah we would fix it ourselves.
--
--
You received this message because you are
On 9 Jan 2010, at 14:15, Sid Bachtiar wrote:
Open source with premium support is the way to go, because you get the
best of both worlds. You get open source product, and you get
commercial support.
Absolutely, and I fully agree.
I also agree with your other points - the point I'm trying to
On 9 Jan 2010, at 17:01, Eno wrote:
On Sat, 9 Jan 2010, Lee Bolding wrote:
How many people saw the critical bugs with PHP 5.2.7, and rather than fix
them themselves, waited for the next release?
We build our own software from source, so yeah we would fix it ourselves.
You patched the
Hey guys,
Just lighting up everyone's day, would like to get as many as possible
arguments on this. Me and a friend of mine, had a debate last evening, about
open source(PHP) vs closed source technologies(DOT NET).He raised the
following points:
1. He feels that open source is not reliable
I think these days, the line between open source and closed source
is somewhat blurred - and this is a good thing.
You now have premium open source - with the likes of RHEL, SugarCRM,
MySQL and Magento. Microsoft technologies are no longer exclusively
closed - I'm currently working with a
On Fri, 8 Jan 2010, Lee Bolding wrote:
The whole IIS/windows server licensing issue is also beginning to
disappear - if you want a well supported, enterprise grade, stable and
scalable PHP environment, you'll likely want Zend Server - which costs
around the same as a Windows Server
On Fri, 8 Jan 2010, Parijat Kalia wrote:
1. He feels that open source is not reliable whereas closed source is. The
logic being that, once the application is developed and sold, if it runs
into some kind of a bug or an error, there is support team for closed source
technologies who are going
On 8 Jan 2010, at 13:43, Eno wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jan 2010, Lee Bolding wrote:
The whole IIS/windows server licensing issue is also beginning to
disappear - if you want a well supported, enterprise grade, stable and
scalable PHP environment, you'll likely want Zend Server - which costs
On Fri, 8 Jan 2010, Lee Bolding wrote:
Yes, but a salaried employee is more expensive than raising a ticket on
a case-by-case basis with the likes of Zend (or buying a support
contract to begin with)
OTOH, that salaried employee will often be doing more than just supporting
a single product
If your server goes
bump in the night, who you gonna call?
We have our own support team to call :-)
Yes, but a salaried employee is more expensive than raising a ticket on a
case-by-case basis with the likes of Zend (or buying a support contract to
begin with)
Seriously, you'd call
On 8 Jan 2010, at 14:40, Sid Bachtiar wrote:
If your server goes
bump in the night, who you gonna call?
We have our own support team to call :-)
Yes, but a salaried employee is more expensive than raising a ticket on a
case-by-case basis with the likes of Zend (or buying a support
And are you talking about your real experience or you're just hypothesizing?
On Sat, Jan 9, 2010 at 3:51 AM, Lee Bolding l...@leesbian.net wrote:
On 8 Jan 2010, at 14:40, Sid Bachtiar wrote:
If your server goes
bump in the night, who you gonna call?
We have our own support team to call :-)
Hi,
Am 08.01.2010 09:46, schrieb Parijat Kalia:
Hey guys,
Just lighting up everyone's day, would like to get as many as possible
arguments on this. Me and a friend of mine, had a debate last evening,
about open source(PHP) vs closed source technologies(DOT NET).He raised
the following
Am 08.01.2010 15:20, schrieb Lee Bolding:
On 8 Jan 2010, at 13:43, Eno wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jan 2010, Lee Bolding wrote:
The whole IIS/windows server licensing issue is also beginning to
disappear - if you want a well supported, enterprise grade, stable and
scalable PHP environment,
On Fri, 8 Jan 2010, Lee Bolding wrote:
Spending 10's of thousands of dollars on a salaried employee to do that,
when Zend will already do it is crazy.
Not necessarily. In some cases, support contracts can cost more than an
employee's salary. Depends on your infrastructure and requirements,
On 8 Jan 2010, at 15:09, Sid Bachtiar wrote:
And are you talking about your real experience or you're just hypothesizing?
Real world, it's the structure we're setting up at the startup I'm currently
working at. IMHO we've spent far less, and have far superior support and
quality of product
Wow, that's a lot of interesting insight. I like the DIY for a bug in open
source vs a dead end to a bug in closed source as a really solid example. I
think that helps open source win vs closed source. Although I do believe it
is an extreme case. Does anyone have more insights to offer?
On Fri,
19 matches
Mail list logo
