Damian
|
| Posted: 07/17/2002, 3:22 PM |
|
Before I go and do some research can anyone help me with advantages disadvantages between ASP.NET and PHP? I know its a wide question and any ideas or comments would be appreciated.
Regards Damian
|
|
|
 |
Ken
|
| Posted: 07/17/2002, 3:50 PM |
|
Beside personal preference, the biggest difference is cost. Not only your cost for development, but the cost to run the web site.
|
|
|
|
Larry Boeldt
|
| Posted: 07/17/2002, 10:01 PM |
|
All of this is my opinion, which is derived from experience.
PHP Can run on Linux, OSX, Windows, UNIX under Apache, Perhaps an AS/400 but I haven't found that yet. Aside from hardware, it can be set up for free by using LINUX. In addition if you are doing simple database work you can utilize mySQL which is a free SQL server (mySQL is also available free for windows). So you can have a dymamic web site basically for the price of hardware and ongoing for your internet connection. Maintainence is a different issue. In trying to get self help for Linux and OSX I find the information takes a lot of digging, it's not worth the time.
Another issue is the LINUX culture. When I do find an expert I'm typically forced to endure unwarranted smugness. Truthfully though, that can be found in all camps, it just seems rampid in the linux culture, perhaps because Linux requires more technical expertice to manage. I've found Linux consulting to be a bit costly, I can find better quality support for Windows and usually for under $125 per hour - that's really contingent on local rates.
The OSX interface is quite compelling. It works well, the product seems pretty solid, it runs PHP and Apache, mySQL is pretty simple to install on the MAC. The PowerPC processor is a screamer, I don't have benchmarks, but simple observation indicates that my 500MHZ PPC is faster than a 500MHZ PIII. But the Mac is a small breed, and again support can be difficult to find, and perhaps costly.
I'll save my recommendation for last. ASP.NET is fast Windows 2000 is rock solid, and a plothera of API capabilities are brought within reach of most developers. I also believe that WIN2K is easier to administer, and well worth the license cost for how easy it makes web farm implementation. I also like the development tools much better: Visual Studio .NET, Dreamweaver MX, and CodeCharge. ASP.NET is less of a programming decision and more of buying into a very robust and feature rich interface. PHP Does have many of the same features and is very robust, but it's still easier to do in MS.
Also consider that the cost will likely drop as Microsoft implements .NET web server. A paired down Windows Server technology specifically designed for internet application servers. The price will be much lower and offer more performance for web applications.
The biggest gripe about windows is security. But I think that has more to do with windows' popularity, and a desire to beat up on the big guy. Fifteen years ago IBM was the bully and was picked on especially in the Microsoft camp. Now the tables have turned, perhaps rightfully so. But all of that considered Linux did post 85 security patches compared to 74 in 2001 (it might have been 2000), regardless there's merit to the notion that much of the Security hype is just that-hype. Security is serious but all companies have their flaws.
One last thought, and this is completely speculative. Consider how many top notch applications are avilable for windows, and how the .NET framework makes parts of applications available to perform specific tasks over the web from web services. It's totally concieveable that a photoshop plug-in could run from a graphics processing server rather than your own processor, making it avilable to any web applcation anywhere. Imagine extending that capability to any GUI based web browser anywhere in the world. Now perhaps there's a bug in your program plug-in algorythm, rather than distribute the patch to your tens of thousands of customers, you just update your graphics servers. The patch is instantly made available to everyone.
|
|
|
|
Ron
|
| Posted: 07/18/2002, 7:12 AM |
|
For me the choice isn't that hard to make.PHP is easy to learn, easy to set up(under linux as well as windows)and it's free. I work with apache because it is easy to set up under win2k and the security is far better then any other webserver and it's free. I use mysql because under windows it's very easy to set up, it's fast and.... it's free.
Now for the support. Ask a question in a newsgroup that you could easely have found an answer to using google or any other search engine and yes you will be told so in no uncertain terms. This is usually done by a small group of people thinking they own the newsgroup. The kill file is a welcome tool to get these people out of my system. In general I get a lot of response, and fast, to questions posted in PHP, Apache or MYSQL groups. They are also almost allways to the point and valuable.
As far as support is concerned.. take a look at all the websites offering free php scripts. I've seen a lot of very helpfull scripts out there.... for free. I can find the same functionality on the web in asp or other MS flavoured languages but.. I'd have to pay thrue the nose to get them.
Yes, with the new .net framework a lot of exciting things can be done, integrating almost every peace of MS software there is. Is this a plus? Yes...if that's what you want. I for one am not prepared to sell my soul to Microsoft. I use win2k because it's a good platform when you're not into linux or if your company is still using it as their primary platform. Under the new licsensing sceme it is almost highway robbery though. My company is seriously considdering changing to linux alltogether just because of the intrusive term of the new sceme.
So the question you should ask yourself is what your ultimate goals are. If you want to cater to MS only browsers and platforms..use asp.net or Visual Basic .net
If you want to keep your options open and make web apps that are platform independant PHP is your choice. The best plus of php is the enourmous community behind it and their willingnes to help, free of charge most of the time.
Ive set up a complete intranet for my company(350 + users) with the only real cost being codecharge. Now go and try to do that with Microsoft flavoured software(ie IIS, SQL server and ASP(.net))
Ron
|
|
|
|
Dave
|
| Posted: 07/18/2002, 10:17 AM |
|
Very good write-ups guys.
The only thing I could add is that 'You get what you pay for.'
So if you have to buy it, chances are its a better product, with more support.
|
|
|
|
Damian
|
| Posted: 07/18/2002, 3:42 PM |
|
It seems to get the added functionality you have to pay pay pay. When I looked at using MS data access pages. The client requirement is an Internet Explorer browser and an MS Office licence and a client above windows 95. Will the same situations apply for ASP.NET? Upgrade the client to XP. Lease an Office licence. Restrict the client to IE? Upgrade the Servers to XP. Use only MS SQL. Use only MS certified personel.
Regards Damian Small
|
|
|
|
ch
|
| Posted: 07/18/2002, 11:54 PM |
|
>Will the same situations apply for ASP.NET?
>Upgrade the client to XP.
No. any OS which have HTML browser
>Lease an Office licence.
No.
>Restrict the client to IE?
No. Client can use any HTML browser.
>Upgrade the Servers to XP.
No. Win2k is enough. And what is more, in near future .NET will work on Linux (Mono project)
>Use only MS SQL.
No. You can use any DB, which have ODBC or OleDb driver.
Also some points:
- .NET framework is free, and you don't need buy licenses (only on OS)
- VS.NET is not required for .NET developing. It's great tool, but you can write. compile and debug your code with standard .NET framework tools.
- The performance of ASP.NET appreciably greater than PHP, ASP and other scripting languages.
- The concept of Web forms in ASP.NET greatly lighten developing of Web applications.
|
|
|
|
stone
|
| Posted: 07/21/2002, 2:54 PM |
|
I think your choice depends on your needs.
If you need a portable solid standard web application language - then it should be PHP because it's easier to understand and portable.
If you have special needs (complex applications and environments) you should analyze the problem first and the languages after.
Personally, I prefer php because of its functionality, my sympathy and the great and helpful community.
Christoph
|
|
|
|
|
