> there. There are too many languages in the world, including ones which
are
> much more capable than PHP in the GUI programming area, and if we move the
> focus to this front, we're going to fight a lost battle. In the Web
front,
> on the other hand, we're doing quite well.
This is the main reason I like PHP so much. It was build for the web and it
grows
with the web. If that focus is kept, PHP will survive. I do not see PHP
surpassing
Java or .NET, but it will be there and will outperform those two!
py
> At 05:36 26-08-01, Manuel Lemos wrote:
> >The first problem is technical. You just keep developing PHP to satisfy
> >the user needs as soon as you perceive them and that's it.
>
> I think we're doing that nicely, but it's quite true that meeting the
> technical needs is not enough.
>
> >The second problem is marketing. It doesn't matter for people that have
> >to make the decisions how much better PHP in fact is if people don't
> >hear about it. Even if they hear about it, it may not be enough if they
> >hear much more from the rest (Java, ASP.Net, C#, , whatever).
> >
> >Here PHP looses bigtime. You may not want to believe me, but I am afraid
> >that unless PHP is better marketted, soon or later its market acceptance
> >will be weakened.
>
> I think you're right here also, but only to a degree. PHP has reached (or
> is quite close) to the critical mess it needs to penetrate the suite of
> 'accepted solutions'. As in, solutions which are covered by analysts and
> that exist within large organizations. It's true that it took it some 5
> years or so to make this penetration (and it took .NET about -2 years),
but
> that is the price you pay when you don't have gigantic marketing budgets
to
> compete with. Undoubtfully this is a problem, but the bottom line appears
> to be that we managed to overcome this, despite the lack of resources.
>
> >That's not my point. Some marketing is better than no marketing at all
> >which is what you do today. There are plenty of ways to do some
> >marketing on PHP that don't even cost money to you.
>
> I don't think it's fair to say that there's no marketing today. Well,
> forget fair, but I don't think it's accurate either :) There are several
> good PHP sites, and there are a few companies advocating PHP as
> well. Analysts are starting to cover PHP, and it's a fairly important
> landmark in PHP's penetration to the family of industry-adopted solutions.
>
> At any rate, suggestions will be welcome. I've seen the Web Developer
Ring
> you suggested, and I think it's worth thinking (the reason I'm not going
> wild with enthusiasm is that I think it also has drawbacks, not only
> advantages).
>
> >oh, man Linux was a different story. Expecting a similar future for PHP
> >I'm afraid it may be wishful thinking. PHP is mostly focused on Web
> >development. Web market is fading out.
>
> I agree with the first part of the paragraph, but completely disagree with
> the 2nd. Web is not fading out, the .COM era is. Web, as a medium, is
> here to stay, and on the long run, it's going to grow to be much larger
> than what it is today.
>
> As for the similarities and dissimilarities of PHP and Linux, I think it's
> fair to say that it's pretty difficult to predict the way things will go
> with PHP in the enterprise, but I doubt it'll happen in a similar way to
> that of Linux. Linux 'made it' when huge corporations like IBM started
> using it and advocating it, after smaller companies (like RedHat) managed
> to create enough hype to 'wake the giants'. It's unlikely that such a
> giant will make the same choice with PHP, even if we just look at it from
a
> statistical perspective.
>
> >Even if you can do non Web programming with PHP, most people are not
> >aware of that. You need to do some marketing to put in evidence that PHP
> >is as much capable for non-Web programming.
>
> Given the fact that I don't see the Web going anywhere, I strongly
> disagree. PHP's strength is in its focus to provide a good Web
development
> framework. Losing that focus would be a bad idea.
> Projects like PHP-GTK are nice and for certain audiences they're also
quite
> useful, but it's very wrong to assume that PHP's future lies in
> there. There are too many languages in the world, including ones which
are
> much more capable than PHP in the GUI programming area, and if we move the
> focus to this front, we're going to fight a lost battle. In the Web
front,
> on the other hand, we're doing quite well.
>
> >There you have another big problem that is there is no affordable way to
> >compile and generate executables from PHP programs. I know that
> >historically you never liked this ability into PHP programs, but that is
> >a vital need for people that will want to distribute their programs like
> >VB or Delphi programs.
>
> If you mean native executables, then I have to disagree with you yet
> again... I don't think native executables are the thing that's holding
PHP
> back. It's a direct deduction from my view that PHP's main course is the
> Web environment, where native executables simply do not make sense.
> If you mean something else, I'll be happy to discuss this with you over
> personal email :)
>
> Zeev
>
>
> --
> Zeev Suraski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> CTO & co-founder, Zend Technologies Ltd. http://www.zend.com/
>
>
> --
> PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To contact the list administrators, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To contact the list administrators, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
