ASP or PHP

ASP and PHP doing the same thing but now i think PHP sucks because someone always said PHP can take over APS... and someone always relate PHP and XML together. so i think someone have no idea what the FU#K they are talking...

----------------
On 11/12/2002 9:12:23 PM

ASP and PHP doing the same thing but now i think PHP sucks because someone always said PHP can take over APS... and someone always relate PHP and XML together. so i think someone have no idea what the FU#K they are talking...
----------------

I really don't think you know what you are talking about.

As far as one or the other being better, I don't think thats a good statement. They are different. I have used both, and my personal preference has always been php, but often the corporate software standard determines what is used.

I like php because it can use most any database, is easily extended, and is very reliable. Best reason of all? It's free. ASP is not when you add in server license, sql server license, component fees for things like file upload and email (to make the job bearable in asp you need to buy third party dll's), asp gets very expensive.

For most projects I have worked on, however, either platform would have worked.

I really don't think you know what you are talking about.

YIKES! I sure hope so, considering that Patrick is the lead developer for Techvibes.com. Ouch.. don't take that Pat
[:p]

I think at this point in time it all comes down to developer preference. A good PHP developer can pretty much do anything a good ASP developer can do. The noticeable difference which will come into play down the road is the further adoption of ASP.NET which is far more powerful than pure PHP. ASP can be more than a just scripting language, while PHP at present is only a scripting language.

I would predict that PHP has a strong future ahead of itself, but needs to be combined with other technologies to meet the full capabilities of ASP and ASP.NET.

Is one better? Depends on the requirements. Need something affordable for basic read/write database driven pages, go PHP. Need a robust framework for advanced development and you have a budget to support your goals, go ASP/ASP.NET

Personally, I use a proprietary software engine which puts both ASP and PHP to shame. IMHO

In reviewing his post again, he said PHP sucks.. Thats fine, it's his opinion. But then he referes to aps, whatever that is, and then mentions XML. Well, the reasons he gave for stating PHP sucks did not support his statement. Being the developer of this web site does not give his statements any weight.

If he wants to say PHP sucks, fine, but give me a valid reason why.

The response concerning ASP and .net, well, we weren't talking about .net, we were talking about PHP and ASP.

hehe.. can't wait to meet you all at the next Tech Vibes!

Hi Guys, cannot believe you guys going so hard on this ASP/PHP stuff, just want to let you guys know i have no problem with PHP at all, i know is good. this whole ASP/PHP is an internal joke, i thought will be super funny to put it up here. that's it.[:)]

I say we all scrap it out at the next Techvibes event... I put 5 bucks on Pat [:p]

hehe.. I usually don't get involved in brand wars.. but what the hell..

I would have to say that I'm truly dedicated to the right tool for the job. I don't care who wrote it.

So why don't you let us all in on the Internal Joke about php and asp?

I would have to say that I'm truly dedicated to the right tool for the job. I don't care who wrote it.

Amen, brother! That's why my server is STILL running on OS/2 after all these years - neither Linux nor Windows of any form were viable alternatives when I started this stuff, and neither has given me sufficient reason to switch.

Nice thing is, I still have all the same server-side goodies available except, of course, ASP. I can put the same PHP/mySQL-based stuff on my Apache/2 server, on my buddy's Apache/W2K server, or on my employer's Apache/Linux servers with little or no tweaking. I even migrated a phpBB board from a version of Linux running on an old PowerMac, to my Warp box.

I would have to say that cross platform abilities of PHP definately give it a major strength over all other server side programming alternatives. It runs on pretty much everything, from the lowliest PC to IBM mainframes. ASP can't do that. Cold Fusion can't do that either. (Maybe PERL can.. don't know about perl, I don't like the complexity of programming in perl..) That makes the opportunities for scalibility and portability much greater than the rest.

[;)]

Perl interpreters are easily as widespread as PHP; the OS/2 version is compiled with Gnu C, and compilers for that exist for almost every platform.

It is long-time *nix based, however, which means a lot of its concepts come from the *nix world and require varying levels of 'tweaking' to work outside that environment; a friend who ran a lot of Perl scripts on a Windows webserver has horror stories about global changes of forward slashes to backslashes and such.

In short, it can certainly be done, but it's not as friendly as PHP. You'll find the vast majority of public PHP scripts are coded on Linux webservers, but even on non-*nix platforms, the interpreter is smart enough to recogize forward- and back-slashes equally.

I'd for sure stick with ASP. The only reason is cause I like burning money.

HAHAHAHA!

(ok.. not funny)

Either/Or.. don really matter..

whatever dude...

I have used both and find that PHP is more like Pascal where ASP is more like VB. If you like programing in one of these type programs then choose.

Personally I like PHP because if I need help there is great website documentation online to help you solve the problems. I also like how easily PHP and MySQL work together to create web applications.

So which ever you choose happy coding [;)]

php is better in technical and philosophical sense :)

and now with php 4.3 new cli, its going to rival perl.

object oriented programming in php is the only way to create reusable modular web applications imho.

ill probably release some modules as open source very soon.

peace,
nathan.[:)]

I'm not a programmer myself but I use PHP here and there.

-Free
-Open source
-Huge community

Enough reasons.

There are many sides to this argument.
I had this exact same discussion before, so half of this is stuff I've said previously on another forum. Excuse me if you've happened to have read it before. :)

First of all, someone said PHP was better because it was cross-platform. Well, news for you, so is ASP. ChiliSoft ported a good version of ASP for Apache/*nix users. It does the job. And if that's how you're determining the best one, then Java wins over all of them because not only is it cross-platform, but it's platform independant.

As for ASP and PHP having equal power... and at the risk of starting a huge discussion which I'm sure everybody has an opinion about... not really.

While I love PHP to death, it lacks some of the fundamental characteristics of an OOP language. i.e. polymorphism, It has come a VERY long way, but it's still got a ways to go before it can catch up to the big boys. Even though it isn't a true OOP language, it can still do, technically, most of what ASP can do. It can even interface with COM objects, it has built-in error handling now as well.

But, my whole point is not ASP vs PHP. It's Java vs ASP vs PHP

I love PHP. And I think it is great for small to mid level traffic. But when you start rolling in about 10,000 requests a second, I'm afraid your server will go down quicker than Whitney Houston on a bag of weed. You see, PHP isn't really scalable (atleast not at this point in time). PHP is quite processor intensive, meaning each request is unique and requires a different process to be initiated. With JSP/Servlets, you compile once and the same application resides in memory for future use, making it a lot easier on your server loads.

So to sum it up, I guess you would say that the best server side programming language should be determined by what it's needed for and not just some widely accepted notion that one is better than the other.

- For enterprise/mission critical applications, you'll probably be better off with ASP or Java. Atleast for now. I think the next version of PHP will tip the scales a little bit.

- For hobbyist/personal sites, sure, use PHP, it's fast, easy and free. Keep in mind though, you might find yourself in trouble if you suddenly start getting more traffic than you ever imagined or bargained for.

Dusky, ASP has a LARGE set of languages that you can write in. It's more of a grouping of languages designed to be the middle man between English and machine language.

Sure, you can write VBScript in it, but that's not all. You can write Java-esque code using JScript with ASP, as well as C# which is essentially the C programming language. So saying ASP is like VB is a bad thing to say. :)

As for PHP being like Pascal, I guess... but that's only because they're both pretty much based on ECMAScript (as is Java, JavaScript, and ActionScript, and numerous other languages).

I dont know much about ASP other than that Apache does not support it. I know PHP is a strong and powerfull scripting language that alot of people use in combination with html. I am really one of those anti-Microsoft fanatics so I am obviously going to say that I like PHP better, not saying that ASP sucks, I heard that it is really good from people, but, not supported on Linux, therefore not better than PHP. [:)]

ASP is supported on Linux and a lot of other OS's too...

http://developer.chilisoft.com/downloads/

You learn something new everyday....

I have had fun in both ASP and PHP, as someone said previously, for simple to mid-level projects. The only large scale multi-year Internet project I managed was in Microsoft. I can see why it was a good choice given the scalability requirements of the project.

I have been training up into .NET and must say I'm very impressed. I'm trying to line up a first project using this technology right now and am looking forward to putting the technology to the test.

BTW anybody know a good .NET web hosting service?

Thanks,
Jasba

we have worked with php and mysql for many years now and i find it to be great. the syntax is just like C and it is clean and runs fast. Otherwise i would use JSP.

I don't have much to say about ASP or .net that would be good so :)

We also sponsor php.net so i am probably just alittle one sided :)

ca2.php.net

enjoy

SQL storage space is expensive. If you rent, it adds up fast. If you buy a license, it hurts even more. For that reason I give ASP a slight downgrade, but I do like all the features it comes with. Speaking of SQL licenses, that reminds me of a post I've wanted to make in a while in the classifieds section (looking for a license).

hey mike,

i would say dump ms sql and go with mysql, it is faster and has great flexibility.

Plus it is free :)

by the way we sponsor mysql too so again i really like mysql. Nasa uses Mysql for there systems so it speaks for its self

wouldn't that mean re-writing the entire site from ASP --> PHP? We are talking about 400+ pages of code...

You wouldn't have to go to PHP at all to use mySQL. Although you would have to test every SQL command to make sure the subtle differences were still compatible.

I hope that your "secondchapter.info" site is no indication of how well PHP runs...I click the link on your ca2.php.net and the site would not load. checked the source code, and it seems to halt right here [list]The company name Acta Divina was selected for its historical meaning, symbolic for the importance of bringing information and development to the consumer.( Acta Divina also known as Acta Diurna ) 1. Histori[/list]stops right at the "i" in History. Hope this helps you.

Well there are tools to help you change. Check out asp2php. It does a fairly good job however, you'll probably have to do some work by hands.

I actually used this tool for a coop project. So I know about the issues in changing over. However, I probably only had 20-30 pages not 400+.[:)]

Yahoo uses MySQL for it's financial applications. That's another reason to switch to PHP/MySQL

However, my language of preference is ColdFusion. [:)]

I don't know why each time someone mentions mySQL that they automatically prepend it with PHP. How about ASP/MySQL ... works equally as well.

Both PHP and ASP are great languages and each have their own features. We use both languages but only recommend one database "MYSQL". Free, Fast, Secure and Reliable.

Cheers
Mitch

I have to agree the mySQL is a great alternative and has nothing to do with the language used. However, I do most of my coding in ASP and find that most web hosts that offer mySQL and not MS SQL are usually running their web servers off of apache with chiliasp which generally results in poor ASP performance.

Where can I download a free version of ASP? (like PHP)

Mitch, I'm sure glad you told me this before we bought our license... its a hard decision to make especially when the licensing cost is in the thousands... oh dear IT genie please tell me the solution... ASP or PHP... MSSQL or MySQL? There has to be a better one once you factor in everything like time, licensing, compatibility, support, etc.

That was a great well thought out answer.
Just to knit pick, actually for something like java (JSP Servlet), each request does get it's own thread which is a process on the server. Albeit that the thread is much lighter in weight than unthreaded multiple server objects.

Java is the way to go for scalability of web pages.

One question though, I've never had to deal with websites that have 10,000 requests a second.

How would someone go about resolving such huge scalability issues? I would imagine that there are multiple servers where users get distributed so the load is about equal on each server. But I wonder how is the web application distributed, are there multiple copies of the "business logic" on each server, One common database?

Any of you know where I can read up on these sorts of scalability issues.

Thanks.

----------------
On 1/15/2003 7:22:55 PM

There are many sides to this argument.
I had this exact same discussion before, so half of this is stuff I've said previously on another forum. Excuse me if you've happened to have read it before. :)

First of all, someone said PHP was better because it was cross-platform. Well, news for you, so is ASP. ChiliSoft ported a good version of ASP for Apache/*nix users. It does the job. And if that's how you're determining the best one, then Java wins over all of them because not only is it cross-platform, but it's platform independant.

As for ASP and PHP having equal power... and at the risk of starting a huge discussion which I'm sure everybody has an opinion about... not really.

While I love PHP to death, it lacks some of the fundamental characteristics of an OOP language. i.e. polymorphism, It has come a VERY long way, but it's still got a ways to go before it can catch up to the big boys. Even though it isn't a true OOP language, it can still do, technically, most of what ASP can do. It can even interface with COM objects, it has built-in error handling now as well.

But, my whole point is not ASP vs PHP. It's Java vs ASP vs PHP

I love PHP. And I think it is great for small to mid level traffic. But when you start rolling in about 10,000 requests a second, I'm afraid your server will go down quicker than Whitney Houston on a bag of weed. You see, PHP isn't really scalable (atleast not at this point in time). PHP is quite processor intensive, meaning each request is unique and requires a different process to be initiated. With JSP/Servlets, you compile once and the same application resides in memory for future use, making it a lot easier on your server loads.

So to sum it up, I guess you would say that the best server side programming language should be determined by what it's needed for and not just some widely accepted notion that one is better than the other.

- For enterprise/mission critical applications, you'll probably be better off with ASP or Java. Atleast for now. I think the next version of PHP will tip the scales a little bit.

- For hobbyist/personal sites, sure, use PHP, it's fast, easy and free. Keep in mind though, you might find yourself in trouble if you suddenly start getting more traffic than you ever imagined or bargained for.

----------------

PHP is a scripting language where as ASP is a technology to enable HTML pages to be dynamic and interactive by embedding either VBScript or JScript

Apples and Oranges

PHP syntax is prototyped after Java, and its purpose is prototyped after Perl. Basically it has the good of both languages. (referring to "Concepts of Programming Languages" by Robert W. Sebesta)

Besides that according to the Oracle's document by Sean Hull, PHP goes head to head with ASP, in terms of speed, efficiency, and portability.

http://www.oracle.com/technology/pub/articles/hull_asp.html

I personally prefer PHP over ASP it runs on all the commercial servers (Unix, Linux, M$ Windows, OS X), it is blazingly fast, and it has a beautiful object oriented syntax. It is a great language whether you are prototyping , or going for a full scale web application.

hth,

Rastin

Oh I agree, php, ASP, or Perl are all interpretive languages, and they can run up to 10 times slower than a program that you actually compile like Java, C++, ...

If we are talking Java, I would vote for it over php, or any other web scripting language.

A lot of the unnecessary server hits happen because of the GUI interactions. Many web applications use server side for things like error checking. The ideal is to utilize the client's computing resource for GUI interactivity as much as possible using DHTML, Macromedia Flash, or Java applets, in that way many of the servers workload will be distributed towards the client side.

"I love PHP. And I think it is great for small to mid level traffic. But when you start rolling in about 10,000 requests a second, I'm afraid your server will go down quicker than Whitney Houston on a bag of weed. You see, PHP isn't really scalable (atleast not at this point in time). PHP is quite processor intensive, meaning each request is unique and requires a different process to be initiated. With JSP/Servlets, you compile once and the same application resides in memory for future use, making it a lot easier on your server loads."

Dont bother with ASP, why not consider ASP.net coupled with C# and you can still use MySQL to keep it all free or go with MS-SQL server to reap the benefits of stored procedures and triggers :p

As an avid CF programmer I am going to throw in my 2 cents into this topic.
When it comes Web Development the focus is to do the most with the lease. I my opinion the best language for the job is Cold Fusion.

Cold Fusion is written in Java so there for carries allot of the benefits of Java. As in Platform independent and run's complied for fast performance.

It is both a tag and script base language. As a Tags based language development is much faster and easer. When time is money that comes in handy. When you need to do more advanced stuff you can write in a Scripting style.

It supports all of those new useful technologies such as XML, Web Services, Flash Remoting, and much more.

On top of having a huge community Cold Fusion was Developed by Macromedia and they pay people to write uniform, organized and searchable Help Doc's.

Cold Fusion can connect to almost all Database types.

The biggest argument I get against CF is the Price. There are 2 answers for this.

First: If you add up the time it takes to make a site in PHP or ASP and compare it to the same time in Cold Fusion then add the price of the Macromedia CF server to the end. You will still most likely be cheaper then the ASP and PHP site.

Second: There is a second company out there that provides CF Server and it is FREE!
http://www.newatlanta.com/products/bluedragon/index.cfm

That is very interesting!

The last time I visited CF was when Allaire was in the limbo, their direction was uncertain, and product supports was sketchy... I guess CF is making a come-back?

As for the free edition of BlueDragon from New Atlanta, it may be more suitable for small businesses, I'd imagine larger companies would want the added security and flexibility offer by the paid edition.

ASP.NET? Try Mono

Didn't realize this thread is over a year old.[:0]

I believe it's 2 years actually! [;)]

MySql is NOT an alternative to MS SQL Server. In fact I can’t think of any reasonable way where they’d even be comparable.

SQL Server is an enterprise database comparable to DB2 or Oracle; MySql is more comparable to a desktop solution like Access. For up to maybe 100 simultaneous users and 10,000 records it would more than suffice but beyond that is just smoking the crazy pipe and singing the “anything but Microsoft” song. And MySql is not free – it does have a commercial license. You’re expected to pay for this unless you also release your source code under the GPL or GPL-compatible license. Whereas you can freely use SQL Server desktop engine and redistribute that with your commercial application. Unusual contrast, huh?

MySql is still early in the development cycle and its engine doesn’t scale well and its query processor doesn’t support complex SQL yet, and the queries it does support are not fully SQL-92 compliant. SQL Server is and SQL Server is also compatible for C2 level security certification. You can see SQL Server’s benchmarks against the top three at www.tpc.org

Whew, I feel better getting that off my chest, thanks :o)

As for the ASP vs. PHP? PHP is quick and easy to code and I don't see a real difference between the two productivity/performance wise. But in the real world I go with .NET... even vs. ColdFusion I’d still argue productivity/performance would be greater going with ASP.NET.

-------

And MySql is not free – it does have a commercial license. You’re expected to pay for this unless you also release your source code under the GPL or GPL-compatible license.

---------

The above only holds true if you want to your distribute your software. And I am sure the commercial license does not cost as much as what you pay for MSSQL .

----------------

You’re expected to pay for this unless you also release your source code under the GPL or GPL-compatible license. Whereas you can freely use SQL Server desktop engine and redistribute that with your commercial application. Unusual contrast, huh?

-----------------

Pay to use then distribute for free OR use free and pay to distribute (IF you don't want to people to look at your source code). Unusual contrast indeed!

mmmm .... nope!


MySql Powers Yahoo

Rastin

----------------
On 9/16/2004 3:39:13 PM, Steve- wrote:

SQL Server is an enterprise database comparable to DB2 or Oracle; MySql is more comparable to a desktop solution like Access.

----------------

I think I would go PHP ...

PHP vs. ASP Oracle document

----------------
On 9/16/2004 3:39:13 PM, Steve- wrote:

As for the ASP vs. PHP? PHP is quick and easy to code and I don't see a real difference between the two productivity/performance wise. But in the real world I go with .NET... even vs. ColdFusion I’d still argue productivity/performance would be greater going with ASP.NET.
----------------

MySql doesn't power Yahoo!, it powers a small section of Yahoo! Finance with an average of 60 concurrent connections.

And your Oracle article is bias and misleading. .NET’s optimized to use OLE DB drivers, not ODBC so I have a hard time putting any weight in their “tests” and findings. Besides that, Microsoft is currently working with Oracle to develop an optimized class for clients to connect to the database with much like the SqlClient optimized for SQL Server.

Nice empirical methods on this article’s authors part too: “IIS has a long history of vulnerabilities.” Dismissing a while technology because one part has had known security vulnerabilities is a little closed minded. Every platform has had a long history of vulnerabilities – software is made by humans and humans make mistakes. Occurrences might seem higher for some because who has the more popular platform? Which also makes a better news story.

Your beloved MySql has certainly had its share of security holes as well. The most recent and pretty severe known hole was published on July 5, 2004:
MySQL is prone to a vulnerability that may permit remote clients to bypass authentication. This is due to a logic error in the server when handling client-supplied length values for password strings. Successful exploitation will yield unauthorized access to the database.
This issue is known to exist in MySQL 4.1 releases prior to 4.1.3 and MySQL 5.0.

free? that has to be the dumbest reason in the world to prefer one language base over another. the interesting thing about "free" is also clear in the lack of certification, and/or accountability involved with tracking programmer capability.

also, it is possible to use any database format with asp pages, and oh did you know? asp.net allows for multiple languages, and hey guess what? the entire dot net framework even allows for php programming and access to web services.

I think its pretty pathetic that the only reason people prefer anything anti microsoft is simply because its microsoft, and no, paying or licensing isn't a good excuse either, since I've never heard anyone complain about coldfusion, which is also licensed, and purchased, and simply the only reason that no one complains about macromedia aka allaire coldfusion is simply because its not microsoft. so folks, lets get off the lemming bandwagon and just admit that every language, every nos and every platform has its uses and functions, and if the sysAdmin and/or programmer is worth their salt, educated, imaginative and capable, can easily integrate all platforms, nos, and prgramming languages to the maximum of its potential.

this is the most boring arguement in the box, and really, i think that there are much more relevant avenues which are more forward and positive thinking.. like say.... free wireless???? yes, indeed, new york has it, johannesburg has it, its available in parts of london, paris etc etc, except here in canada.

in my humble experience, only those that can't cross code, and cross platform manage, tend to complain about the one that they suck at...

free? that has to be the dumbest reason in the world to prefer one language base over another. the interesting thing about "free" is also clear in the lack of certification, and/or accountability involved with tracking programmer capability.

also, it is possible to use any database format with asp pages, and oh did you know? asp.net allows for multiple languages, and hey guess what? the entire dot net framework even allows for php programming and access to web services.

I think its pretty pathetic that the only reason people prefer anything anti microsoft is simply because its microsoft, and no, paying or licensing isn't a good excuse either, since I've never heard anyone complain about coldfusion, which is also licensed, and purchased, and simply the only reason that no one complains about macromedia aka allaire coldfusion is simply because its not microsoft. so folks, lets get off the lemming bandwagon and just admit that every language, every nos and every platform has its uses and functions, and if the sysAdmin and/or programmer is worth their salt, educated, imaginative and capable, can easily integrate all platforms, nos, and prgramming languages to the maximum of its potential.

this is the most boring arguement in the box, and really, i think that there are much more relevant avenues which are more forward and positive thinking.. like say.... free wireless???? yes, indeed, new york has it, johannesburg has it, its available in parts of london, paris etc etc, except here in canada.

in my humble experience, only those that can't cross code, and cross platform manage, tend to complain about the one that they suck at...

free? that has to be the dumbest reason in the world to prefer one language base over another. the interesting thing about "free" is also clear in the lack of certification, and/or accountability involved with tracking programmer capability.

also, it is possible to use any database format with asp pages, and oh did you know? asp.net allows for multiple languages, and hey guess what? the entire dot net framework even allows for php programming and access to web services.

I think its pretty pathetic that the only reason people prefer anything anti microsoft is simply because its microsoft, and no, paying or licensing isn't a good excuse either, since I've never heard anyone complain about coldfusion, which is also licensed, and purchased, and simply the only reason that no one complains about macromedia aka allaire coldfusion is simply because its not microsoft. so folks, lets get off the lemming bandwagon and just admit that every language, every nos and every platform has its uses and functions, and if the sysAdmin and/or programmer is worth their salt, educated, imaginative and capable, can easily integrate all platforms, nos, and prgramming languages to the maximum of its potential.

this is the most boring arguement in the box, and really, i think that there are much more relevant avenues which are more forward and positive thinking.. like say.... free wireless???? yes, indeed, new york has it, johannesburg has it, its available in parts of london, paris etc etc, except here in canada.

in my humble experience, only those that can't cross code, and cross platform manage, tend to complain about the one that they suck at...

To put it in simple words, don't think "free" software is unreliable , and don't expect commercial software to be reliable. There is no accountability in either part of the universe. Read the warranty information.

Although there is no accountability amongst the "free" developers, there is a commitment on their part and on the part of the "free" community on the whole. That is the reason bugs and security holes are detected and fixed quickly in "free" software.

With commercial software, the bugs and security holes remain undetected or severely exploited. Some commercial software have more security holes and become "patchy". I believe some commercial software should now be called "a patchy" instead of the popular and free "Apache".

I do believe co-existence, and heterogeneity of software would lead to effective and efficient systems. But when the makers of one software start hating the makers of the "other" and try to exterminate/obliterate/efface the "other", that is where the problems starts

And everyone knows we have strayed away from the ASP or PHP discussion to something totally different - a war of 2 software worlds.

You're kidding right? A fresh install of Apache 2 = 25 patches (per apacheweek.com). A fresh install of Windows 2003 = 22 patches (per windowsupdate.microsoft.com). Both were released at about the same time in 2002. All software vendors face patch management issues and they all release about the same amount of patches.

The implementation of these patches from a network admin perspective is expensive. It's costly to bring mission critical machines offline to update them. It has to be planned for which is where these two to three month timeframes come from (and they're the same timeframes across the platforms).

Traditionally the patches were released within days but now Microsoft has the monthly schedule. So time to market use to be about the same but now there could be a couple weeks' difference. I don't think this is a bad thing at all - it gives these mission critical networks a more reliable method to plan by. But more importantly most vulnerabilities are discovered and exploited as a result of the patch being released! Patch management is complicated and challenging and all the vendors face these issues.

Ok, so we have two "A patchy"s - but you pay for one :)

Patch management is certainly going to be a way of life for netadmins too. Most mission critical applications, would have more than one server acting as a mirror / backup / load balancer. So, taking servers down one at a time for installing the fixes isn't really going to affect availability. And while other servers are waiting for the patches, keep your fingers crossed that the vulnerabilities don't get expolited.

Thanks for the statistics Steve.

HA! You got me; I do have to pay for mine.

Windows Server 2003 - US$5,000 on MasterCard,
SQL Server 2000 - US$20,000 on MasterCard,
Getting the fabulous new SP2 for my Windows XP which makes me remove the Microsoft Java VM leaving me to consider using Sun's and slowing down my Windows.... priceless.

Windows Small Business Server 2003 Premium Editions
$1,947 with SQL 2000 included

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/sbs/howtobuy/pricing.mspx
[;)]

SP2 is for XP!

That Small Business Server price is just for 5 clients/users. It's not licensed for a public web server.

Client Access Licensing: If unidentified users browsed your public Web site Windows CALs would not be required.

So the 5 Cals means you can conect up to 4 other servers to your Database and have one left for your administration contection.

----------------
On 9/17/2004 7:25:14 PM, jmendham wrote:

this is the most boring arguement in the box, and really, i think that there are much more relevant avenues which are more forward and positive thinking.. like say.... free wireless???? yes, indeed, new york has it, johannesburg has it, its available in parts of london, paris etc etc, except here in canada.
----------------

I wouldn't say Canada doesn't have it. I live in Fredericton, New Brunswick and here they just launched the Fredericton e-Zone project (or something like that anyway), and we have free wireless access at the Fredericton Airport and covering almost the entire downtown area.

Click here for an article on it.

So there... maybe Western Canada isn't all it's cracked up to be. Keep on rockin' maritimes. :)

The Web Server doesn't count as a client. The client connecting through a web server counts as a client, and if those clients (or the web server to fulfill the client request) makes use of SQL Server then you've violated your licensing agreement and thus stole that software. SQL Server requires per processor licensing for anonymous clients.

heh, this arguement is still happening is it? classic.
Look, in my opinion, if one cannot function within all languages with an over achiever desire to learn all the benefits to each, as well as a logical approach to each database management, and NOS, and/or OS then I suppose we could argue about it till hell freezes over.

The bottom line is simple. If {insert language/platform here} was the best, we'd all be using it, and it would be a non issue.

so, anyone enjoying the weather yet?

PHP! ... becuase I say so ...

Rastin

I second Rastin...stupid .Net widgets and other Microsoft junk

F

Let's see ... so far we have :

A dude that states "C# is like C" (first page), voices his objection about the lack of ONE oo feature and thus gives the thumbs up to ASP

A dude that thinks MS products (IIS, MS SQL) are good value for the money because they have a comparable number of patches with the free stuff (I'd like to be his friend he's got to be very rich ....)

Personally I use ASP way more then PHP just because I'm lazy, when I'm not I still do it in straight C, I am starting to get a feeling that there is going to be a shift though I'm relly liking where SUN is going. Add to that netbeans and its looking like a we are going to have a very nicely rounded package (app server, db, enterprise tools and ide) for FREE. This is just what a lazy (well only sometimes really) developer needs.

PS Please don't start preaching about oo vs waterfall, this is after all about ASP vs php

Talking about the database. you can now download, install and use Oracle 10i in the commercial software for free with the limited space.

I started with ASP and then used .NET 2.0 , C# and ASP.NET ( www.skitennisgolf.com ) and now I do lot of work in PHP for my clients.

I definitely like Visual Studio 2005 - Master Pages, Themes as well as the other new features that are in 2005. .NET is very well suited for large enterprises. You can do lot many things in .NET.

PHP has dramatically evolved to be my second language of choice. We do work in osCommerce, Drupal and Joomla a lot and I must say that I am really liking the pace that Open Source has picked up over last 2 to 3 years.

For those sitting on ASP ( I still have some clients looking to migrate ASP to .NET 2.0), if it doesn't meet your needs - better move to .NET.

I've yet to figure out how to get a site indexed in search engines if you have deployed .NET precompiled code.( Reason I did it was because I did not want anyone - not even at the shared hosting company to be able to look at my code + better performance). The search engines just find webresource.axd file.

Roshan
http://www.bpocanada.com

PHP is my language of choice. I like its human-friendly syntax, and all the complex things that can be accomplished with PHP.
Of course, it has some minuses but so does ASP and any other language.

I'm a C# guy myself, I've used PHP and liked it. Honestly what matters is the speed of development. If I wanted to develop everything in PHP I'd be an idiot, it takes twice as long to develop anything in PHP. When developing a .NET ASP solution, half of the code is already built for you inside of the .NET framework. , and because C# is a true OOPL, I can reuse many classes that I've built in the past on current and future projects. Plus the folks at Microsoft have made our job a little bit easier, with things like Master Pages, and Web Parts. Sure PHP is a much more flexible language in terms of interoperability, however, the clients that you're going to want are the one's with money, the one's with money run MS shops. So if you want to make a whole lot of money in a short amount of time, go with the RAD solution, and pick ASP with a VS IDE. Otherwise, keep wasting your time sticking to something that performs only marginally faster than ASP. And if performance is your concern, than learn how to mult-tier your applications.

I have an internal site developed for Shell that manages architectural drawings on a UNIX server, DB on one tier, a web-service on another, and the client-tier. There are about 1500 users using the system simultaneously, and there is no, and I mean no lag whatsoever. This application and it's respective tiers took 2 months to develop. The big boys don't use scripting languages for professional apps.

-

if you want to use OOP, then why don't you go the Java/jsp route? People say java is slow, but I have run application with java for some time and have not found the speed to be an issue. The only time I would consider that is if I was doing something hugely computationally expensive like a graphics app. Most of what web developers work on though is database BI stuff in which case the work is done by the db anyway, so this should not be an issue.

F