PHP 5.0 Goes For Microsoft's ASP-dot-Net 478
Dozix007 writes "Uberhacker.Com reports : Zend Technologies quietly announced last week the final release of the open source PHP version 5. An interesting article reports the different strengths and weaknesses of ASP vs. PHP, and it becomes quite clear that with the release of PHP5, Zend has taken a shot at ASP's heart. The differences from PHP4 to 5 has created a clear advantage for the new preprocessor over Microsoft's proprietery ASP."
Taking the world (Score:4, Informative)
Another article (Score:5, Informative)
Re:It's Visual Studio, not the languages! (Score:5, Informative)
ASP.NET inaccuracies (Score:5, Informative)
The article implies that CLR code is interpreted. All .NET runs compiled code, either JIT or AOT compiled. And there's an unsubstantiated remark about efficiency and "Long code paths". That looks like FUD to me, and without something substantial it seems suspicious.
Re:Ok, here is where I object: (Score:4, Informative)
Exactly. This is my biggest complaint against proprietary/commercial software, and the largest benefit of Open Source. As a sys admin I spend more time trying to figure out how many licenses we have, what is a legal use of a license, when we should upgrade, why we should upgrade, etc... Maintenance of the licenses cost us more than the license purchase itself.
On top of that, old versions are usually unavailable for purchase after the new version is released, so we can't just purchase one license of a perfectly useful product for a new employee, we have to upgrade 30 people.
For me, PHP vs ASP would be an obvious decision just because of the licensing. With PHP don't have to maintain the licenses. When I need to add a new server I wouldn't have to pay for an upgrade on the 10 existing servers.
Meinel (Score:3, Informative)
Re:It's Visual Studio, not the languages! (Score:3, Informative)
For community support, the Usenet is very good. Microsoft have a lot of groups on their servers (msnews.microsoft.com, or something like that), or you can use groups.google.com (microsoft.public.x.x.x), but that's a vastly inferior interface.
Re:It's Visual Studio .. PHP Editor Galores! (Score:5, Informative)
All of them (commercial,free,OSS) reviewed and classified: http://www.php-editors.com/ [php-editors.com]
My personnal (and free) favorite : PHP EDIT: http://www.waterproof.fr/ [waterproof.fr]
Need a PHP Debugger? DBG can do remote debugging and it can be integrated with the PHP Edit IDE, which is very nice : http://dd.cron.ru/dbg/ [dd.cron.ru]
Now, who need Visual Studio? Almost every (php) editors now has code insight, integrated help, code completion, skins and whatnot. Hell, I sometimes go back to Notepad for quick fixes because its faster to fire up. But if you said PHP need an IDE, I think that you have not looked around very much.
Now people start your eng-uh editors and go code some PHP!
Re:Ok, here is where I object: (Score:5, Informative)
Licensing issues get a little more complex when dealing with database servers and the like, but using Oracle isn't going to change that and it's not like you can't use MySQL with ASP.NET.
I'm all for the advantages of OSS and PHP does have advantages, but let's not cloud the issue unnecessarily.
Re:Sorry no (Score:2, Informative)
I use php all the time, but php is more like the old asp than
Quote from article:
PHP 5's major new achievements come in the area of its exception handling and a new object that introduces features that bring true OOP to PHP
And my opinion added on: You do not need to use something like VStudio for anything smaller than enterprise sized ASP.net or PHP development. Textpad is more than adequate. I really dont see what u will gain by using some huge IDE for personal development.
Re:It's Visual Studio, not the languages! (Score:3, Informative)
as far as ASP.Net is concerned, I'd recommend www.asp.net [asp.net] as a starter site, along with w3schools' asp.net section [w3schools.com] for a reference/overview.
I'll add another namedrop for MSDN though, and point you to the .net Class Library reference [microsoft.com]
Re:Ok, here is where I object: (Score:5, Informative)
No. You only need a license for the server itself. If you have a licensed installation of whatever running you can install ASP.NET. No need to purchase a license. Your developers can all install ASP.NET on their personal machines. No need to have anything but an OS to install it on.
surprised no one mentioned the documentation (Score:3, Informative)
(1) Thorough, beautifully organized, accurate documentation with minimal but effective examples.
(2) Fast searching. php.net/[searchterm] - it doesn't get much easier to look up a function, short of having the docs built into the IDE (Zend)
(3) User comments. I've contributed a few comments myself when I've run into sticky issues and then realized what was going on. And more than a few times, I've found little code snippets attached to the relevent functions that are good ways to use them. PHP and ASP, in my mind, are both tools for RAPID development and deployment. PHP is good at rapid; very good. The docs are a major reason. They make familiarizing with something like a new extension library very easy.
Re:PHP 5.0 Goes For Microsoft's ASP-dot-Net (Score:3, Informative)
Troll rhymes with Truth: "THE DRAFT IS COMING BACK, National Service Act of 2003 - 2004, S.89, H.R.163"
That bill is dead in the water and has been for over 1.5 years [congress.gov].
2/3/2003:
Referred to the Subcommittee on Total Force.
Re:Microsoft's default .NET programming language (Score:1, Informative)
The choice between the big 3 languages is still left up to the developers, without MS pushing one over another.
Going back on topic, VB.net might be more commonly used in ASP.net because the original ASP usually used VBScript.
Re:It's Visual Studio, not the languages! (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Ok, here is where I object: (Score:3, Informative)
Comment removed (Score:3, Informative)
Re:It's Visual Studio, not the languages! (Score:2, Informative)
Way too much FUD (Score:5, Informative)
The author completely ignored one of ASP.NET's greatest advantages - it is an abstraction from writing HTML (which I guess they think makes it inefficient, just like C is less efficient than machine language). When I write:
TextBox t = new TextBox();
t.Text = "Hello World";
I do not know, nor care, what actual markup will be returned to the client. Before you start worrying that you need absolute control - consider the problem of delivering to multiple browsers/devices. ASP.NET will render different markup, depending on the browsers capabilities. When browsing from a PDA or phone, it will render appropriate markup. Does PHP do that?
Re:Performance Claims (Score:2, Informative)
http://www.php-accelerator.co.uk/ [php-accelerator.co.uk]
yeah, it's not available for php5, yet
Re:I don't trust Zend. (Score:4, Informative)
I can't see why this is a problem for you - is the Apache license also problematic for you?
The Apache license and the PHP/Zend licenses are incompatible with the GPL, but they do qualify as free licenses under the DFSG guidelines.
Re:It's Visual Studio, not the languages! (Score:2, Informative)
Re:What is the best way to learn PHP5? (Score:2, Informative)
Eclipse is way ahead of VS.NET... (Score:2, Informative)
VS.NET has the whole WYSINQWYG (What You See Is Not Quite What You Get) html/asp editor, but after pages get slightly complex, or you start taking advantage of User/Custom controls, the visual designer is more of a limitation than a benefit. The ability to create User controls is a really useful feature in ASP.NET.
I currently use both in an enterprise/production environment. I much prefer the CVS/Refactoring/Auto-Compile/etc. features that Eclipse has over the few minor advantages of VS. VS.NET also has some annoying bugs, whereas the latest and greatest Eclipse has been rock solid for us.
Also, at home I dabble in PHP and have good results using Eclipse with the PHP plugin from xored.com. It would still be nice to have a Visual HTML/PHP designer plugin (that was free).
Re:Object Oriented Scripting?! (Score:2, Informative)
You realize you can do ASP.NET in C#, right?
From Microsoft's "Getting Started: Web Applications Technology Map" [microsoft.com]:
Huh? C# *is* ASP.NET (Score:3, Informative)
ASP.NET doesn't just run on IIS either. Apache runs it along with Mono.
Re:Total hearsay FUD (Score:2, Informative)
Very Simple (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Oh, PLEASE! (Score:2, Informative)
Oh please... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Performance Claims (Score:3, Informative)
Re:This says it all (Score:1, Informative)
ASP.NET makes it possible to create components that circumvent the need JavaScript. The component writer will have to do the JavaScript of course. It does not provide every component to address every JavaScript need out of the box. In fact there never has been a RAD abstraction over a lower level framework that made every thing the lower level framework has done. If that is the case there is no need for third party components.
ASP.NET is a RAD component Framework much like VCL. Delphi/C++ Builder components don't do everything you can dream up of. Which is why people made over 4000+ OSS components and 4000+ proprietry component using the framework and native Win32 calls so that the end user developers can plug and play with components. ASP.NET is like that.
The author misses nice combination - Apache::ASP (Score:2, Informative)