Re: [XPOST from WDSCI-L] Webfacing out, EGL in

[Joe Pluta <joepluta@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

David Gibbs wrote:
> Joe Pluta wrote:
>   
> > Not sure what your point is here.  I don't consider basic PHP to be a
> >  viable production web application environment
> >     
>
> Lots of people think otherwise.
>   
<sigh> I really didn't want to go here, but we may as well get this 
straightened out.  The fact that lots of people use PHP is more because 
it's what most ISPs support rather than any intrinsic value of the 
language.  Popularity is hardly a measure of quality.

Lots of people use Visual Basic.  Doesn't make it good.  Just makes it 
cheap and easy.

> For those IBM i based organizations, who use PHP, and do not need / want Zend Enterprise can get support for PHP from the community ... like most other, non i, organizations that use PHP.
>   
And my point is that people who use the System i are unlikely to be the 
type who commit mission critical systems to open source and web 
support.  They aren't the types to buy the ":lots of people use this" 
argument either.

> > I'm less sanguine about the support received from open source 
> > communities.  Sometimes it's very good, sometimes not so good. That's
> >  why when I talk about PHP as part of an enterprise environment, I am
> >  not considering an environment where PHP.net is your primary 
> > resource.  Once you go down the pure open source route, then why not 
> > Ruby?  Or Python? The possibilities are endless!
> >     
>
> Yes, and lots of organizations are doing just that.
>   
How many i shops are using Python for mission critical systems?  In 
fact, how many companies do you know using open source for mission 
critical systems that *don't* have some sort of extended support 
contract in place?

> > Some companies may be willing to do that, and I'm not saying it's 
> > wrong.  But I'd guess that a lot of companies are unwilling to commit
> >  their mission critical systems to a web-supported open source 
> > development environment.
> >     
>
> Considering how many companies DO use PHP ... I _think_ that statement is incorrect.  I don't have hard numbers to back my opinion up though.
>   
I doubt it, David.  I'd love to hear about companies without support 
contracts using PHP for, say, their primary order entry system - or 
indeed for anything other than their basic web presence.

> > And that's where the discussion of Java EE vs. RPG-CGI vs. PHP vs. 
> > EGL comes into play.
> >     
>
> When it comes down to it ... EGL is just *ONE* way for an organization to get an application on the  web.  It's not the _BEST_ solution, it's not the _ONLY_ solution (although it is the newest) ... it's just ONE solution.  
Certainly it's only one solution.  And I always say use the best tool 
for the job.  But PHP?

> There are many others.  PHP, JSP, Python, Ruby, CGI, .net, etc.  Each have their pluses & minuses.  Organizations need to evaluate their needs, consider their resources, review the tools, and make an informed decision.
>   
Okay.  Give some reasons to use PHP other than "lots of people use it".  
Remember, that same argument then gives you Visual Basic, or Perl.  Lots 
of people using Perl.  And the "lots of programmers" argument is the 
same.  Also, before you go to the "large library of software" be sure 
you're talking about the right version of PHP - there's lots more 
software for PHP 4 than there is for PHP 5.

On the flip side, there are some good reasons to not use PHP.  Heck, PHP 
won't even support UNICODE until PHP 6 is generally available.  That's 
your mission critical web application language?

Joe