thanks for the good explanation
Matthew Ratzloff wrote: > > Without knowing anything about your specific situation, I'll try to answer > as best as I can about Zend Framework and Rails. > > Presumably you already know PHP, so with Zend Framework you only need to > learn the framework. Therefore your speed of development at first will be > higher compared to Rails. Out of the box, performance is decent--not > great. > It can be improved by using autoloading and commenting out the > require_once > statements, as well as standard PHP strategies (opcode cache, etc.). And > it's free, of course. Maintainability is reasonably high with the > framework, although major changes still occur (e.g., Zend_Application). > These are almost always positive, but these changes necessitate > not-infrequent revisiting of existing code. > > The biggest advantage to Zend Framework, however, is its library of > reusable, (generally) high-quality components. You don't have to decide > among 2-20 different solutions for ACL or pagination; it's a "batteries > included" framework, so to speak. > > Rails is an older, more established framework, and it has a larger > community > as well. Code generation is really a minor part of developing anything > but > a trivial application. Don't be taken in by the "create a blog in 10 > seconds" screencasts; you still have to do the heavy lifting. Ease of > Ajax > is similar in both, and Rails of course has templating as well. > > Rails is also not hard to deploy--in fact, with projects like Rack, > Passenger, and Capistrano, I'd say the Ruby community as a whole has taken > deployment more seriously than the PHP community. If deployment is a real > concern, something like Maven is where you'll want to focus your energy. > > Rails does not have the library that Zend Framework has. To install > additional functionality you'll probably end up using RubyGems, which > means > evaluating different options to find the one that best fits your needs. > > Looking at the overall ecosystem, ActiveRecord and DataMapper are nice, > but > Doctrine is really strong as well. Zend_Db requires way too much > boilerplate code, in my opinion. > > Perhaps most importantly, Rails' biggest advantage is Ruby itself. PHP as > a > language just doesn't compare. > > Anyway, both frameworks are good, but in different ways. > > -Matt > > On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 10:10 PM, iceangel89 <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> i am using Zend Framework now, but hear that Ruby on Rails is great, >> speeds >> up development and all. ASP.NET MVC is also out. i am looking at these >> alternatives to see what they offer but will like some of ur opinions >> >> what might be some of the advantages/disadvantages of each? like in terms >> of >> - speed of development >> - speed (performance) of execution >> - cost >> - etc >> >> for a start: >> Zend Framework my background with this is ~3 mths >> >> Good: >> >> * Templating thru Zend_Layouts & Zend_Views >> * Zend_Forms, Zend_Validation, Zend_Filter: assists in form inputs >> * Zend_Tool now allows for something like Ruby on Rails's CMD code >> genration except that its now still very limited in terms of >> functionality >> >> Bad: >> >> * steep learning curve >> * can be confusing for me now still >> >> Ruby on Rails viewed some screencasts only >> >> Good >> >> * i like the cmd code generation for controller, actions, models and >> forms >> * it seems to be easily incorporated with AJAX >> >> Bad >> >> * i get the impression that it will be hard to deploy >> >> ASP.NET MVC also watched a few screencasts only >> >> Good >> >> * i like LINQ >> * extensive support with VS 2010 will speed up development >> >> Bad >> >> * expensive >> >> -- >> View this message in context: >> http://www.nabble.com/General---Web-Development-Frameworks-tp23936439p23936439.html >> Sent from the Zend Framework mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >> >> > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/General---Web-Development-Frameworks-tp23936439p23981025.html Sent from the Zend Framework mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
