I'm surprised that Java and Servlet hosting isn't as popular as PHP.
For us (web design/hosting shop) the choice between php and java came down to the overhead required on shared servers.
Our choices at the time were to use a single JVM to support all shared hosts on a server or use a separate JVM for each shared host.
The second option was out of reach financially (just couldn't afford shiny new servers, we had the servers we had - and had to make them work, and they wouldn't handle running dozens of dedicated JVMs.)
But the first option wasn't all that apealing either. If one site crashed the JVM, lots of client sites came down with it. In addition, there were some security issues with cross-site VM pollution that didn't give us the warm and fuzzy about sharing a single VM.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not anti-java. I had been developing with java for a couple of years prior, and wasn't really looking forward to "stepping down" to php. I liked java then, and still do, and wish it well. I may end up needing it again.
Now, this decision was made a couple years ago, and I'm sure much has changed since then, but I've been happy with the decision to use php. And now with PHP5, much has changed since then.
Re:Congratulations are in order!
on
A Decade of PHP
·
· Score: 1
Another db abstraction layer you might want to look into is Creole.
It's built for PHP5 but there is also a php4 back port made to support another project.
The "Faramir divergence" as I have come to call it was and remains my biggest grievance of the movies. I can appreciate what PJ was trying to accomplish and makes a good case for it in the EE commentary but I still respectfully disagree.
I went back and carefully re-read that portion of the book. Faramir (in the book) never sees the ring and in fact, doesn't even know what it is. He is able to piece together some of the facts based on a conversation with the hobbits but he only knows that they carry "some weapon of the enemy". As far as he knows, it could be a sword. He also learns that his brother Boramir (who he respected, admired and loved) ultimately fell to the lure of the ring and that it destroyed him. It is in this context that Faramir shows his (and his bloodline's) integrity and states "I would not pick this thing up even if it lay by the side of the road." Because he knows what it would do to him if he did pick it up, he rejects it before he has really been tempted by it.
In my opinion, its like the person who rejects heroin or cocaine before trying it - because they know the potential effects.
Keep in mind too that Faramir is similar to the hobbits in the sense that, unlike Boromir, he never expects to sit on the throne of Gondor. He never expected great power or rulership to come to him and never desires it - much like hobbits. This is why it is so easy for him to turn over the Kingship to Aragorn, something his brother would have found much more difficult to do.
When I read the book, I suspect that the ring would indeed corrupt Faramir, just as it would anyone else. But Faramir doesn't allow himself to be tempted by it - ergo his integrity. Unlike the movie version, Faramir takes the entire "journey" in a single scene and I think that could have been protrayed on screen "properly" - especially by a storyteller as gifted as PJ.
Just my $.02. Still, I can't wait for Wednesday - I've taken the day off work to catch it during the day.
- Dan
I bought a Canon Rebel 2000 some time ago and have been really happy with it. The shop where I bought it gave a two night class on SLR cameras for "free". I spent more than I could have on the camera but the class was a nice value add for someone like myself who had never used an SLR.
I can pretty much do as much or as little as I like in terms of setting the time, aperature, whatever but my wife can use the "green box" mode and point and shoot. I really like the flexibility. I got pretty excited about it for a while but the cost of film development cooled my jets after a while.
I now find myself doing a lot more web work and after seeing the comments about a digital SLR body, I'm intrigued. It might be easier (and cheaper in the long run) than developing film and scanning since I don't own a flatbed scanner either.
Anyway, For what it's worth, I've been very happy with it. I've never used a Nikon or Pentax so I can neither recommend nor disparage them.
Isn't this akin to saying "If god does exist, and you don't believe you'll go to hell - so isn't it better to err on the side of caution?"
I don't buy this arguement any more than I might buy the arguement that since miscrosoft has more money and better marketing, it's safer to assume the worst case scenario and just adopt.net now.
As a reasonable person, I'm sure you would agree that much more data needs to be collected on the subject before any conclusive analysis can be made. - just my $.02
just my $.02 on your third point - I develop on Solaris and deploy on HP/UX. I've never had a problem and so far, everything has been quite speedy. No complaints here.
I'm no encryption guru, but would it be possible to design an algorithm to encrypt two sets of content with two keys simultaneously? The result would be that one key would decrypt the content to some arbitrary text and the second key would decrypt the content to the "real" content. dchaos - just thinking while I type.
Slashdot Mirror
For us (web design/hosting shop) the choice between php and java came down to the overhead required on shared servers.
Our choices at the time were to use a single JVM to support all shared hosts on a server or use a separate JVM for each shared host.
The second option was out of reach financially (just couldn't afford shiny new servers, we had the servers we had - and had to make them work, and they wouldn't handle running dozens of dedicated JVMs.)
But the first option wasn't all that apealing either. If one site crashed the JVM, lots of client sites came down with it. In addition, there were some security issues with cross-site VM pollution that didn't give us the warm and fuzzy about sharing a single VM.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not anti-java. I had been developing with java for a couple of years prior, and wasn't really looking forward to "stepping down" to php. I liked java then, and still do, and wish it well. I may end up needing it again.
Now, this decision was made a couple years ago, and I'm sure much has changed since then, but I've been happy with the decision to use php. And now with PHP5, much has changed since then.
It's built for PHP5 but there is also a php4 back port made to support another project.
I've been using it for a little while and really like what I see.
http://creole.phpdb.org/wiki/
I went back and carefully re-read that portion of the book. Faramir (in the book) never sees the ring and in fact, doesn't even know what it is. He is able to piece together some of the facts based on a conversation with the hobbits but he only knows that they carry "some weapon of the enemy". As far as he knows, it could be a sword. He also learns that his brother Boramir (who he respected, admired and loved) ultimately fell to the lure of the ring and that it destroyed him. It is in this context that Faramir shows his (and his bloodline's) integrity and states "I would not pick this thing up even if it lay by the side of the road." Because he knows what it would do to him if he did pick it up, he rejects it before he has really been tempted by it.
In my opinion, its like the person who rejects heroin or cocaine before trying it - because they know the potential effects.
Keep in mind too that Faramir is similar to the hobbits in the sense that, unlike Boromir, he never expects to sit on the throne of Gondor. He never expected great power or rulership to come to him and never desires it - much like hobbits. This is why it is so easy for him to turn over the Kingship to Aragorn, something his brother would have found much more difficult to do.
When I read the book, I suspect that the ring would indeed corrupt Faramir, just as it would anyone else. But Faramir doesn't allow himself to be tempted by it - ergo his integrity. Unlike the movie version, Faramir takes the entire "journey" in a single scene and I think that could have been protrayed on screen "properly" - especially by a storyteller as gifted as PJ.
Just my $.02. Still, I can't wait for Wednesday - I've taken the day off work to catch it during the day. - Dan
I can pretty much do as much or as little as I like in terms of setting the time, aperature, whatever but my wife can use the "green box" mode and point and shoot. I really like the flexibility. I got pretty excited about it for a while but the cost of film development cooled my jets after a while.
I now find myself doing a lot more web work and after seeing the comments about a digital SLR body, I'm intrigued. It might be easier (and cheaper in the long run) than developing film and scanning since I don't own a flatbed scanner either.
Anyway, For what it's worth, I've been very happy with it. I've never used a Nikon or Pentax so I can neither recommend nor disparage them.
Isn't this akin to saying "If god does exist, and you don't believe you'll go to hell - so isn't it better to err on the side of caution?" .net now.
I don't buy this arguement any more than I might buy the arguement that since miscrosoft has more money and better marketing, it's safer to assume the worst case scenario and just adopt
As a reasonable person, I'm sure you would agree that much more data needs to be collected on the subject before any conclusive analysis can be made. - just my $.02
just my $.02 on your third point - I develop on Solaris and deploy on HP/UX. I've never had a problem and so far, everything has been quite speedy. No complaints here.
I'm no encryption guru, but would it be possible to design an algorithm to encrypt two sets of content with two keys simultaneously? The result would be that one key would decrypt the content to some arbitrary text and the second key would decrypt the content to the "real" content. dchaos - just thinking while I type.