I’m not sure that a comparison can be made between .NET/Java and PHP in the web environment in terms of power and simplicity. It’s like comparing apples to steak (it doesn’t matter which is the steak). PHP is a scripting language (primarily for web servers) while the .NET framework and Java have a far wider range of uses. Yes, the .NET framework and the Java standard libraries are far more complex and abstract, but the solutions which these frameworks tackle have required increasing levels of complexity as those frameworks have developed. I guess I think that any path can be powerful when engineering solution, it just depends on what type of engineering you are doing. Yay, Relativism!
Rubikzube: So that puts PHP out of the race. Now, what about Perl, Python and Ruby? What is really that much more powerful about the Java class library than about (if you allow my bias) the CPAN?
The difference is that there aren’t several hundred billion dollar companies pushing it. I’m interested in the assumption that abstract and complex frameworks are viewed as a prerequisite for solving complex problems. The successful large applications I’ve worked with have been, at their core, extremely simple models of the business.
The failed large applications I’ve worked with have had ludicrously abstract concepts as ‘business events’ and ‘participants’ and ‘involvements. IBM and MSFT push complexity for a reason ….
Ryan Tomayko:
Background:
“Microsoft guru: Stamp out HTTP” [zdnet.com]
comment at 23. September 2005
Rubikzube:
I’m not sure that a comparison can be made between .NET/Java and PHP in the web environment in terms of power and simplicity. It’s like comparing apples to steak (it doesn’t matter which is the steak). PHP is a scripting language (primarily for web servers) while the .NET framework and Java have a far wider range of uses. Yes, the .NET framework and the Java standard libraries are far more complex and abstract, but the solutions which these frameworks tackle have required increasing levels of complexity as those frameworks have developed. I guess I think that any path can be powerful when engineering solution, it just depends on what type of engineering you are doing. Yay, Relativism!
comment at 23. September 2005
Aristotle Pagaltzis:
Rubikzube: So that puts PHP out of the race. Now, what about Perl, Python and Ruby? What is really that much more powerful about the Java class library than about (if you allow my bias) the CPAN?
comment at 23. September 2005
Michael Koziarski:
Aristotle,
The difference is that there aren’t several hundred billion dollar companies pushing it. I’m interested in the assumption that abstract and complex frameworks are viewed as a prerequisite for solving complex problems. The successful large applications I’ve worked with have been, at their core, extremely simple models of the business.
The failed large applications I’ve worked with have had ludicrously abstract concepts as ‘business events’ and ‘participants’ and ‘involvements. IBM and MSFT push complexity for a reason ….
comment at 28. September 2005
Aristotle Pagaltzis:
I don’t know what you arguing about in relation to my point. It seems like you wanted to address Rubikzube, not me.
comment at 29. September 2005