[ciapug] Zend / MS partnership

[Carl Olsen]

ASP.NET is easy to install, Visual Studio is free, and Visual Studio comes
with a built in web server, just like NetBeans comes with Tomcat built in.
I removed IIS from my Windows XP machine and installed Apache.  I work with
Solaris servers at work, two of them use JSP and Tomcat and two of them use
PHP and Apache.  PHP is slightly harder to run on Windows, but any PHP code
I write that runs on Windows runs on Solaris.  Sometime the code I write
using notepad will run just fine on Solaris, but won't run on Windows.  As
soon as I make the changes it needs for Windows it still runs just fine on
Solaris.  As far as I can tell, and PHP code you write for Windows will run
on Solaris with Apache.

I think PHP is harder to install because of all the extension libraries.
ASP.NET comes with all of that stuff already installed, and components can
be dropped into the bin folder to add functionality.  ASP.NET is nothing
like ASP.  I agree that Microsoft will probably tell you it's an upgrade,
but it's more like moving from PHP to Java, only PHP is far superior to ASP.

Overall, I find PHP easier to use than ASP.NET or Java.  I also realize that
I'm not compiling any of my PHP code, so I'm trading ease of use for
efficiency.

-----Original Message-----
From: ciapug-bounces at cialug.org [mailto:ciapug-bounces at cialug.org] On Behalf
Of Daniel.Juliano at wellsfargo.com
Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 9:18 AM
To: ciapug at cialug.org
Subject: RE: [ciapug] Zend / MS partnership



-----Original Message-----
From: ciapug-bounces at cialug.org [mailto:ciapug-bounces at cialug.org] On
Behalf Of Carl Olsen

> PHP is far better than ASP and Microsoft doesn't have 
> anything like it. Microsoft abandoned ASP and moved to 
> ASP.NET which is more like Java.  PHP is the easiest 
> web programming language to set up and use quickly.  
> I'm not surprised.  This might explain why ASP hasn't 
> been revised since version 3.
>
> Carl

Just a little zealotry there.

ASP.Net is the upgrade from ASP.  Microsoft intends for you to code
using their Visual Studio, which makes assembling web pages as easy as
using MS Access to build Access front ends, so from their point of view,
they've made life easier and there's no real 'abandonment' going on.

Back on a standard install of Win98, you had Personal Web Server (anyone
remember that?) and could code ASP out of notepad - absolutely free,
easy as pie to set up, no extra licensing required.  ASP.Net is a bear
to set up properly (IIS, install the right .Net framework, learn the
management mmc), while PHP one click installers have made open source
life a cakewalk.  So perhaps PHP is easier to setup and run nowadays.

-----Original Message-----
From: ciapug-bounces at cialug.org [mailto:ciapug-bounces at cialug.org] On
Behalf Of Tony Bibbs

> I'm at the Zend conference as I write this and 
> they had quite a bit of coverage here about it.
> There is a set of patches for PHP that are going
> to be rolled into the codebase that alleviate
> some of that performance under windows/IIS.
>
> I agree with you, run it where it was made to
> be happy but from Zend's perspective PHP adoption
> will depend on their ability to run it under IIS
> for those companies that won't make the jump to *nix.
>
> --Tony

Imagine this scenario: company X (or where I happen to work) runs
Windows infrastructure only.  Employee "Bob" (or Dan) is hired, and
happens to know ASP.Net and PHP, and prefers PHP for small projects
because some of the libraries are superior.  If PHP is performant on IIS
and supportable by Windows admins (as dubious a title as that is), "Bob"
has a much greater chance of being able to write PHP.  Furthermore, down
the road, company X now has the opportunity to switch out the OS to
*nix.

So this announcement is a pretty good one, from my point of view.

=Dan

_______________________________________________
ciapug mailing list
ciapug at cialug.org
http://cialug.org/mailman/listinfo/ciapug