PHP suffers from many of the same problems as CGI (logic and HTML combined in the same place, etc)
This doesn't make any sense. You can write PHP externally included PHP functions that return values to code that is used to display the data. You can also write modules, ala Beans in JSP. And even excepting that, mod_perl is even worse since it's not inherently embedded in HTML, correct?
However, PHP, even well-written PHP. will never be as fast as a well-written mod_perl handler, for the simple reason that mod_perl handlers are compiled once and live in memory for the life of the Apache server (parent) process. There is no file to read every time it gets called.
Never is a long time.:) PHP3 may have the limitations you cite, but PHP4 with Zend does not. Take a look at the Zend products page. I believe it addresses the exact issues you cite.
Plus, PHP (and CGI, and JSP, and servlets) have the limitation that they can only produce output.
This doesn't sound right to me, but I don't entirely understand what you're getting at so I'll skip it and let somebody else it pick it up.
You want to customize the authentication process? Nope, you can't do that in JSP.
I don't about JSP's capabilities in this case, but you can definitely customize the authentication process in PHP. Check out page 505 of the Wrox PHP book.
As far as mod_perl not scaling well, I will not consider this limited to execution time. In my experince, it quadruples the resident memory size of Apache daemons. It underscores the fact that Perl is carrying around a lot of baggage that doesn't necessarily apply to the web. PHP and JSP are web languages.
How about we give credit where credit is do. Apple did not come up with their OS all on their own. They ripped off many of their "ideas" from Xerox PARC.
Ah yes. I love it when people base their knowledge of computer history on made-for-TV movies.
First, Apple bought PARC concepts from Xerox, not stole them. Xerox received oodles of Apple stock for bringing Apple engineers over to Palo Alto. Xerox had no interest in bringing the stuff into the mainstream.
Second, from what I've seen PARC is a lot more like X11/motif than Mac UI.
Microsoft had a Macintosh-Level GUI when they released Windows 1.0 and blatantly ripped off many Mac concepts. But since then they've improved a hundred-fold on the original design and now have a GUI that is far superior to anything Apple has ever produced.
That's really amusing. Even if you do believe the Windows UI is better than the Mac's (which in itself is not something I can remember hearing), do you really believe it's better by a HUNDRED FOLD?
Gaming on Linux is still something of a lackluster area
More realistically, gaming on any computing platform other than Windows is still something of a lackluster area. Mac may be proportionately better, but it still pretty much pales in comparison to the titles available to Windows.
What does the operating system have to do with Quicktime?
QuickTime is an integral part of the Apple software architecture. Unlike Microsoft however, Apple didn't intergrate QuickTime into the OS in order to cut out competitors. When QuickTime came out, there really weren't competitors to speak of.
And they keep swiching back and forth between Open Source and proprietary.
Switching back and forth? I think I missed that part. They open sourced Darwin, QuickTime Streaming Server, and OpenPlay (and probably others). I don't believe any of that has been un-Open Sourced.
Oh I SEE, if a company doesn't just instantly hand over all its intellectual property and secrets to the public, reducing shareholder value by inconceiveable amounts, it's being a bad company. right.
Just look at how they treated the Apple Mac port of Linux!
I don't get this reference, and I followed it pretty closely. I believe it boils down to the fact that the value of MkLinux in a world of Darwin and LinuxPPC in questionable.
It's currently fashionable to think of Apple as the anti-Microsoft, and thus the enemy of my enemy is my friend. Unfortunately, I see little evidence that that's the case.
Funny, to me it seems that it's currently fashionable to think of any company with business interests and shareholders as equivalent to Microsoft.
[i]So Apple would have to spend millions of dollars writing device drivers for their OS, because we all know that the hardware vendors aren't going to do it.[/i]
FINALLY somebody gets it! People in the Linux world sometimes forget that most human beings can't just go off and write their own device drivers.:)
Just like Linux, rap music was something that scared corporations until it was big enough to be profitable
The same could be said about GUIs, the internet, computer games, computers themselves -- or virtually any other major breakthrough in the industry. As someone else noted, the situation that hip hop is in is by no means unique either. (posting by punkass):
Okay, rock scared people in the fifties and many radio stations wouldn't play it...until it was commercially viable. Same with Jazz/Blues in early part of the twentieth century. Actually, you could also say the same about New Wave, Techno, Punk, Ska, Heavy Metal, Swing, Latin...just about every popular music form today went through a period where it was supported by a grass-roots movement until it became big enough for record companies to take interest in it.
I can understand how an individual would like to tie two things together that [s]he is interested in, but this is kind of stretching it. I find it particularly ironic that so much hip hop music revolves around amounts of money, and that's sort of the opposite (or at least a secondary) goal of open source.
- Scott ------ Scott Stevenson
These aren't really unique to Perl
on
Perl 5.6.0 Out
·
· Score: 1
*Regexps- Perl has an extremely complete regexp syntax built in
Yes. I would go as far to say this is one of Perl's crown jewels.
*scalars- Although it is conceptually strange, perl's use of a single "scalar" data type (as opposed to string, int, and float) makes life a lot easier [...]
*Hashes- Hashes kick ass, and perl has them built-in [....]
*Arrays- No, arrays are not unique to perl, but perl makes better use of them [...] In particular, the foreach command [...]
*Syntactic sugar- Perl is very un-picky about things like parenthesis, and has a number of ways to input and format data [...]
All of these things are nice, but none of them are really unique to Perl. They're fairly common in any "very high level language." PHP is one example that springs to mind. Probably the biggest thing Perl has going for it is the fact that is "community support/ease of use" ratio is very good. This is similar to Visual Basic on the Widnows side of things, and AppleScript on the Mac. PHP is quickly getting there as well. It's tempting to say Python as well, but my feeling is that there's a bit more of a conceptual learning curve there. Object orientation just requires a different way of thinking that has the potential to be confusing for newbies.
Many languages have either ease of use or a strong community (the two often conflict), but when you get the two together, you get a very practical language.
"...a more reliable company like Microsoft.." Do you actually expect me to buy this? What am I basing my "reliablity" rating on exactly? My experience with Microsoft products, or just their market cap and media influence? - Scott ------ Scott Stevenson
Handwriting recognition in computers still is poor at best.
IMHO, the handwriting on the late-model Newtons was much better than what Palm has now. You didn't have to learn a special language, and you could write anywhere on the screen, not just in that little box. This was one of the reasons I wasn't immediately enamored with the Palm when it came out. It really felt like a download from the Newton.
I haven't been able to find any comments that make this specific point --
It's pretty clear to me that The X-Box is Microsoft's defense to the PSX2. I don't think MS just woke up one day and decided it was going to get into the gaming console business. I think it realized the computer-like capabilties that the PSX2 has, along with the raw power and brand/marketing presence of Sony -- and saw a recipe for disaster. PSX2 could take major chunks out of MS in the consumer market. It's a threat to their monopoly.
The real concern here is that Microsoft could further limit choice in the consumer electronics world. Up until now, if one got too fed up with trying to get PC games to work, or the type of games offered for PCs, one could pick up a conole for a couple hundred bucks, and leave DirectX hell behind. The X-Box seeks to extend the cloud of darkness into the console world. In 12-18 months, I could see Microsoft begin to manipulate the press and public opinion, and convince people that the X-Box is gaining on the PSX2, and that more people are choosing it because it is Windows-based, yadda yadda. This feeds on itself, of course. These are all the same tatics used to spread NT.
However, I suspect some problems may arise when PC developers start to port their games to X-Box, and realize that they can't just leave things out, or bugs in, and ask people to get updates later. That's just not acceptable in the console world.
ASP has the better market share, so you'll be able to find more resources (consultants, books, courses). WO has the better tools. It's a Betamax-VHS problem.
How much research did you do exactly?:) There of tons of big name sites that use WebObjects. Some are Disney, Adobe, Toyota, BBC, MCI, Toshiba. There are many others. As for finding consultants, WebObjects allows you to write apps in Java, Objective-C (same as Mac OS X's Cocoa!), or WebScript. I'm sure you can find one or two Java developers out there.:)
You can use Mac OS X Server (BSD Unix based) or Windows NT for deployment.
Or Solaris or HP-UX. I believe Solaris is the most common deployment platform for the big guys.
Just letting us have it, free or not, open-source or not, would win Apple a lot of longhaired fans. And it needs them...
I sort of doubt it. No matter what Apple does, slashdotters receive it with extreme combativeness and hostility. Apple didn't get nearly enough credit for open sourcing Darwin, QuickTime Streaming Server and Open Play. Apple is also contributing the Apache project on a regular basis, but that hardly ever gets mentioned.
Apple has spent around a decade or so on QuickTime development, and while I think it makes a lot of sense for them to port it to Linux, it's silly for other posters (though not you) to insist that Apple just release it into open source. It's not as if they can sell service contracts on QuickTime Player.
I get the feeling that the Linux community will continually come down on Apple until they switch their hardware line to systems based on x86 with Linux preinstalled, which is unfortunate. We should encourage the development of several platforms to choose from in the industry, not just several flavors of Linux.
I find it really amusing how so many people (including Tog) are experts on something they haven't even used. I also find it amusing that poeple are willing to blast Apple for being too radical with a new look in the face of the success of Apple's hardware line.
Many of the people that I've encountered, or whose articles I have read that don't like Aqua, ultimately state that they want Apple to keep the Platinum look. That just doesn't make any sense. So Apple is just supposed to keep the same basic UI for 20 years? I'm sorry folks, that's just not the way things work.
As I said in another post, I have no sympathy for people that complain about the UI just because they never want it to change. I just don't get that.
witness the deafening roar of bitching Mac users erupted in when QuickTime 4 was released Deafening roar? Please. There were a half dozen or or people that complained. The fact that this is perceiving as a "deafening roar" is ridiculous. There were a few vocal individuals, but it was really big news since Apple haden't made any UI changes in so long. I personally don't have much sympathy for people that don't want QuickTime 4/Sherlock/Mac OS X just due to the fact that the want the Mac UI to stay basically the same. That's just plain silly. I remember similar conversations when the iMac came out. Who needs color? We've got beige. Either way, Apple's getting a ton of press out of this. - Scott ------ Scott Stevenson
ASP = language independant object toolkit for writing server side web applications
PHP = combination of a new high level scripting language and a way of embedding it in HTML and having an http server execute it.
Zend = free language independent parsing engine for writing server side web applications, powers PHP4
ASP is a well thought out object model that gives access to session maintenance at a range of persistence levels and scopes, as well as cached, efficient DB connections, and feature rich objects that handle HTTP transactions.
Feature rich objects, now with 40% more widgets!:)
Session management is built into PHP4, and is available in PHP3 through PHPLIB. I have no idea what qualifies as "cached, efficient DB connections", but I know MySQL is quite fast and effecient. Plus, you don't have to pay $1500 for MS SQL Server.
How is mozilla going to survive all of this craziness? How high is it on Steve Case's list?
Which is actually pretty ironic. From what I understand, AOL bought Netscape for Netcenter, which was popular so quickly because it was the default page in Communicator. If the Netscape browsers fade into obscurity due to malnutrition, Netcenter would likely do the same.
People also realize that Xerox was PAID in great quantites of Apple stock for access to GUI concepts right? They didn't steal. Xerox was clear on the concept: Apple pays us to bring our ideas to the mainstream.
And please don't assume that Xerox was the first organization to think of making something other than a command line.
Slashdot Mirror
PHP suffers from many of the same problems as CGI (logic and HTML combined in the same place, etc)
:) PHP3 may have the limitations you cite, but PHP4 with Zend does not. Take a look at the Zend products page. I believe it addresses the exact issues you cite.
This doesn't make any sense. You can write PHP externally included PHP functions that return values to code that is used to display the data. You can also write modules, ala Beans in JSP. And even excepting that, mod_perl is even worse since it's not inherently embedded in HTML, correct?
However, PHP, even well-written PHP. will never be as fast as a well-written mod_perl handler, for the simple reason that mod_perl handlers are compiled once and live in memory for the life of the Apache server (parent) process. There is no file to read every time it gets called.
Never is a long time.
Plus, PHP (and CGI, and JSP, and servlets) have the limitation that they can only produce output.
This doesn't sound right to me, but I don't entirely understand what you're getting at so I'll skip it and let somebody else it pick it up.
You want to customize the authentication process? Nope, you can't do that in JSP.
I don't about JSP's capabilities in this case, but you can definitely customize the authentication process in PHP. Check out page 505 of the Wrox PHP book.
As far as mod_perl not scaling well, I will not consider this limited to execution time. In my experince, it quadruples the resident memory size of Apache daemons. It underscores the fact that Perl is carrying around a lot of baggage that doesn't necessarily apply to the web. PHP and JSP are web languages.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
How about we give credit where credit is do. Apple did not come up with their OS all on their own. They ripped off many of their "ideas" from Xerox PARC.
Ah yes. I love it when people base their knowledge of computer history on made-for-TV movies.
First, Apple bought PARC concepts from Xerox, not stole them. Xerox received oodles of Apple stock for bringing Apple engineers over to Palo Alto. Xerox had no interest in bringing the stuff into the mainstream.
Second, from what I've seen PARC is a lot more like X11/motif than Mac UI.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
Microsoft had a Macintosh-Level GUI when they released Windows 1.0 and blatantly ripped off many Mac concepts. But since then they've improved a hundred-fold on the original design and now have a GUI that is far superior to anything Apple has ever produced.
That's really amusing. Even if you do believe the Windows UI is better than the Mac's (which in itself is not something I can remember hearing), do you really believe it's better by a HUNDRED FOLD?
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
Are they trying to make a push into the high end server market?
Well, they do make out quite nicely with WebObjects. Why not make a WebObjects box, ala Oracle's raw iron?
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
Gaming on Linux is still something of a lackluster area
More realistically, gaming on any computing platform other than Windows is still something of a lackluster area. Mac may be proportionately better, but it still pretty much pales in comparison to the titles available to Windows.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
What does the operating system have to do with Quicktime?
QuickTime is an integral part of the Apple software architecture. Unlike Microsoft however, Apple didn't intergrate QuickTime into the OS in order to cut out competitors. When QuickTime came out, there really weren't competitors to speak of.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
And they keep swiching back and forth between Open Source and proprietary.
Switching back and forth? I think I missed that part. They open sourced Darwin, QuickTime Streaming Server, and OpenPlay (and probably others). I don't believe any of that has been un-Open Sourced.
Oh I SEE, if a company doesn't just instantly hand over all its intellectual property and secrets to the public, reducing shareholder value by inconceiveable amounts, it's being a bad company. right.
Just look at how they treated the Apple Mac port of Linux!
I don't get this reference, and I followed it pretty closely. I believe it boils down to the fact that the value of MkLinux in a world of Darwin and LinuxPPC in questionable.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
It's currently fashionable to think of Apple as the anti-Microsoft, and thus the enemy of my enemy is my friend. Unfortunately, I see little evidence that that's the case.
Funny, to me it seems that it's currently fashionable to think of any company with business interests and shareholders as equivalent to Microsoft.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
[i]So Apple would have to spend millions of dollars writing device drivers for their OS, because we all know that the hardware vendors aren't going to do it.[/i]
:)
FINALLY somebody gets it! People in the Linux world sometimes forget that most human beings can't just go off and write their own device drivers.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
The same could be said about GUIs, the internet, computer games, computers themselves -- or virtually any other major breakthrough in the industry. As someone else noted, the situation that hip hop is in is by no means unique either. (posting by punkass):
I can understand how an individual would like to tie two things together that [s]he is interested in, but this is kind of stretching it. I find it particularly ironic that so much hip hop music revolves around amounts of money, and that's sort of the opposite (or at least a secondary) goal of open source.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
*Regexps- Perl has an extremely complete regexp syntax built in
Yes. I would go as far to say this is one of Perl's crown jewels.
*scalars- Although it is conceptually strange, perl's use of a single "scalar" data type
(as opposed to string, int, and float) makes life a lot easier [...]
*Hashes- Hashes kick ass, and perl has them built-in [....]
*Arrays- No, arrays are not unique to perl, but perl makes better use of them [...] In particular, the foreach command [...]
*Syntactic sugar- Perl is very un-picky about things like parenthesis, and has a number of ways to input and format data [...]
All of these things are nice, but none of them are really unique to Perl. They're fairly common in any "very high level language." PHP is one example that springs to mind. Probably the biggest thing Perl has going for it is the fact that is "community support/ease of use" ratio is very good. This is similar to Visual Basic on the Widnows side of things, and AppleScript on the Mac. PHP is quickly getting there as well. It's tempting to say Python as well, but my feeling is that there's a bit more of a conceptual learning curve there. Object orientation just requires a different way of thinking that has the potential to be confusing for newbies.
Many languages have either ease of use or a strong community (the two often conflict), but when you get the two together, you get a very practical language.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
"...a more reliable company like Microsoft.." Do you actually expect me to buy this? What am I basing my "reliablity" rating on exactly? My experience with Microsoft products, or just their market cap and media influence? - Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
Handwriting recognition in computers still is poor at best.
IMHO, the handwriting on the late-model Newtons was much better than what Palm has now. You didn't have to learn a special language, and you could write anywhere on the screen, not just in that little box. This was one of the reasons I wasn't immediately enamored with the Palm when it came out. It really felt like a download from the Newton.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
I haven't been able to find any comments that make this specific point --
It's pretty clear to me that The X-Box is Microsoft's defense to the PSX2. I don't think MS just woke up one day and decided it was going to get into the gaming console business. I think it realized the computer-like capabilties that the PSX2 has, along with the raw power and brand/marketing presence of Sony -- and saw a recipe for disaster. PSX2 could take major chunks out of MS in the consumer market. It's a threat to their monopoly.
The real concern here is that Microsoft could further limit choice in the consumer electronics world. Up until now, if one got too fed up with trying to get PC games to work, or the type of games offered for PCs, one could pick up a conole for a couple hundred bucks, and leave DirectX hell behind. The X-Box seeks to extend the cloud of darkness into the console world. In 12-18 months, I could see Microsoft begin to manipulate the press and public opinion, and convince people that the X-Box is gaining on the PSX2, and that more people are choosing it because it is Windows-based, yadda yadda. This feeds on itself, of course. These are all the same tatics used to spread NT.
However, I suspect some problems may arise when PC developers start to port their games to X-Box, and realize that they can't just leave things out, or bugs in, and ask people to get updates later. That's just not acceptable in the console world.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
ASP has the better market share, so you'll be able to find more resources (consultants, books, courses). WO has the better tools. It's a Betamax-VHS problem.
:) There of tons of big name sites that use WebObjects. Some are Disney, Adobe, Toyota, BBC, MCI, Toshiba. There are many others. As for finding consultants, WebObjects allows you to write apps in Java, Objective-C (same as Mac OS X's Cocoa!), or WebScript. I'm sure you can find one or two Java developers out there. :)
How much research did you do exactly?
You can use Mac OS X Server (BSD Unix based) or Windows NT for deployment.
Or Solaris or HP-UX. I believe Solaris is the most common deployment platform for the big guys.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
As Ross Perot would say, problem solved.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
Just letting us have it, free or not, open-source or not, would win Apple a lot of longhaired fans. And it needs them...
I sort of doubt it. No matter what Apple does, slashdotters receive it with extreme combativeness and hostility. Apple didn't get nearly enough credit for open sourcing Darwin, QuickTime Streaming Server and Open Play. Apple is also contributing the Apache project on a regular basis, but that hardly ever gets mentioned.
Apple has spent around a decade or so on QuickTime development, and while I think it makes a lot of sense for them to port it to Linux, it's silly for other posters (though not you) to insist that Apple just release it into open source. It's not as if they can sell service contracts on QuickTime Player.
I get the feeling that the Linux community will continually come down on Apple until they switch their hardware line to systems based on x86 with Linux preinstalled, which is unfortunate. We should encourage the development of several platforms to choose from in the industry, not just several flavors of Linux.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
I find it really amusing how so many people (including Tog) are experts on something they haven't even used. I also find it amusing that poeple are willing to blast Apple for being too radical with a new look in the face of the success of Apple's hardware line.
Many of the people that I've encountered, or whose articles I have read that don't like Aqua, ultimately state that they want Apple to keep the Platinum look. That just doesn't make any sense. So Apple is just supposed to keep the same basic UI for 20 years? I'm sorry folks, that's just not the way things work.
As I said in another post, I have no sympathy for people that complain about the UI just because they never want it to change. I just don't get that.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
witness the deafening roar of bitching Mac users erupted in when QuickTime 4 was released Deafening roar? Please. There were a half dozen or or people that complained. The fact that this is perceiving as a "deafening roar" is ridiculous. There were a few vocal individuals, but it was really big news since Apple haden't made any UI changes in so long. I personally don't have much sympathy for people that don't want QuickTime 4/Sherlock/Mac OS X just due to the fact that the want the Mac UI to stay basically the same. That's just plain silly. I remember similar conversations when the iMac came out. Who needs color? We've got beige. Either way, Apple's getting a ton of press out of this. - Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
Microsoft's spokesperson for ASP said:
:)
So, let's try it slowly:
ASP = language independant object toolkit for writing server side web applications
PHP = combination of a new high level scripting language and a way of embedding it in HTML and having an http server execute it.
Zend = free language independent parsing engine for writing server side web applications, powers PHP4
ASP is a well thought out object model that gives access to session maintenance at a range of persistence levels and scopes, as well as cached, efficient DB connections, and feature rich objects that handle HTTP transactions.
Feature rich objects, now with 40% more widgets!
Session management is built into PHP4, and is available in PHP3 through PHPLIB. I have no idea what qualifies as "cached, efficient DB connections", but I know MySQL is quite fast and effecient. Plus, you don't have to pay $1500 for MS SQL Server.
Sorry, I can't help it. I'm a PHP advocate.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
How is mozilla going to survive all of this craziness? How high is it on Steve Case's list?
Which is actually pretty ironic. From what I understand, AOL bought Netscape for Netcenter, which was popular so quickly because it was the default page in Communicator. If the Netscape browsers fade into obscurity due to malnutrition, Netcenter would likely do the same.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
I think alot of people will stick with or upgrade to MacOS 9 because of this.
Right. The same amount people that kept their Performas because they didn't like the "crazy colors" of the iMac. Darn newfangled gadets.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
People also realize that Xerox was PAID in great quantites of Apple stock for access to GUI concepts right? They didn't steal. Xerox was clear on the concept: Apple pays us to bring our ideas to the mainstream.
And please don't assume that Xerox was the first organization to think of making something other than a command line.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
There were instructions in DOS6 for how to nuke OS/2 and install DOS 6.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
Isn't it part of being in big business to do whatever you can to ensure your market share?
I think the general slashdot mantra is that things don't have to be this way. I tend to agree. By you
I mean if the patent office is willing to give amazon a patent for one click shopping then more power to amazon for thinking of it!
By that logic, more power to people who come up with frivilous lawsuits!
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson