[flexcoders] Re: WebORB or AMFPHP for big Application
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Mark Piller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That said, it means all the features one would find in our .NET edition are going to be available in WebORB for PHP Can you already give us a rough timeline when the professional PHP edition of WebORB will be available? Stefan
[flexcoders] Re: WebORB or AMFPHP for big Application
Thank for your reply Patrick! Now we are waiting for Mark Piller reply's. :o) Good luck in your new job! David www.ideeclic.com --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Mineault [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Keep in mind that AMFPHP may go under the radar (or drop off it completely) as the lead developer has decided to pursue another career and I have not seen any announcement of anybody else taking over for him. I'll be releasing amfphp 2 before I retire, and I have someone here that is interested in picking up amfphp, someone I can't mention just yet but trust me that my successor will be a very talented and respected member of the community that I am sure will do an awesome job with the project. As to which you should choose between amfphp and WebORB, it depends. Mark loves his WebORB, and I love amfphp, but they are different projects, and have different design goals, so that either one is most appropriate for different uses. The differences are subtle though, I'll be the first to admit, which is why I wasn't particularly thrilled about WebORB and SabreAmf when they first came out, as I felt it was a duplication of efforts (much like the well-publicized argument over SWX with Aral). But regardless, the effort has already been put in, so there's no use in stopping it now. I'll restate the design goals of amfphp from the homepage: - Nothing required - PHP4/PHP5 compatible, no extensions needed - Low footprint, lightweight, fast - Convention over configuration (service and class mapping) - Can be embedded into a framework (see CakeAmfphphttp://cakeforge.org/projects/cakeamfphp/, Seagull http://trac.seagullproject.org/ticket/1378) - Services are non-specific PHP classes that are portable to anything without code change - Productivity tools included (service browser, code gen, profiling) - Batteries included - XML-RPC, JSON - Not a framework by itself (use your own) I'd like if Mark could put up a similar statement of design goals for weborb so that users can make an informed decision. As for the issue of the AMF extension, I've contacted Mark about it, and in theory weborb could be made compatible, and SabreAMF will be eventually (as far as I can tell). I don't think Mark wants to do it though, perhaps because of the way the serializer is implemented on their side. My personal feeling is that the serializer and unserializer in WebORB are misadapted to the realities of PHP, split into several classes for doing simple, computationally intensive things, but one could argue (and I'm sure that Mark would) that clarity of code was chosen over performance, a valid decision if it doesn't affect performance that much (and Mark is right, the 50-200ms difference won't really make a difference in most projects, but in some which have very high traffic it most definitely will, which is why the AMF extension was made). Patrick
[flexcoders] Re: WebORB or AMFPHP for big Application
Thanks Patrick, I'm happy to talk about the goals we have for WebORB. The vision for the product is to provide the best possible design/runtime platform for Flex applications and .NET/PHP/Ruby backends. Our goals include: - non-intrusive approach - ease-of-use - simplicity of integration - extensibility - increased developer productivity plus all the usual suspects expected anywhere from a one person shop to a major enterprise: - performance - reliability - scalability Currently we're wrapping up a new release for WebORB for .NET and as soon as it is out in production, we will port all the new features to PHP and Ruby. That said, it means all the features one would find in our .NET edition are going to be available in WebORB for PHP (and Ruby). For example, take a look at WebORB Data Management for Flex (http://www.themidnightcoders.com/weborb/dotnet/wdmf-faq.shtm), this is something Flex/PHP developers would love to have. On top of this add real-time messaging, remote shared object support, data push, code generator, performance monitor, etc. I highly value code clarity and elegant software design and I am strongly convinced that a product with a clear and well-thought out design does NOT have to suffer in the area of performance. All our products share the same design. As a result, porting features or fixing bugs takes only a fraction of time than creating a new implementation from scratch. For instance, it took us only three weeks to create the very first release of WebORB for PHP. And lastly, when choosing an open-source product (and this is strictly my personal opinion) I would recommend going for one backed by a commercial entity. After all, if I bet my business on it, I want to make sure I have someone to call at 3am in the morning if things go bad. Cheers, Mark --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Mineault [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Keep in mind that AMFPHP may go under the radar (or drop off it completely) as the lead developer has decided to pursue another career and I have not seen any announcement of anybody else taking over for him. I'll be releasing amfphp 2 before I retire, and I have someone here that is interested in picking up amfphp, someone I can't mention just yet but trust me that my successor will be a very talented and respected member of the community that I am sure will do an awesome job with the project. As to which you should choose between amfphp and WebORB, it depends. Mark loves his WebORB, and I love amfphp, but they are different projects, and have different design goals, so that either one is most appropriate for different uses. The differences are subtle though, I'll be the first to admit, which is why I wasn't particularly thrilled about WebORB and SabreAmf when they first came out, as I felt it was a duplication of efforts (much like the well-publicized argument over SWX with Aral). But regardless, the effort has already been put in, so there's no use in stopping it now. I'll restate the design goals of amfphp from the homepage: - Nothing required - PHP4/PHP5 compatible, no extensions needed - Low footprint, lightweight, fast - Convention over configuration (service and class mapping) - Can be embedded into a framework (see CakeAmfphphttp://cakeforge.org/projects/cakeamfphp/, Seagull http://trac.seagullproject.org/ticket/1378) - Services are non-specific PHP classes that are portable to anything without code change - Productivity tools included (service browser, code gen, profiling) - Batteries included - XML-RPC, JSON - Not a framework by itself (use your own) I'd like if Mark could put up a similar statement of design goals for weborb so that users can make an informed decision. As for the issue of the AMF extension, I've contacted Mark about it, and in theory weborb could be made compatible, and SabreAMF will be eventually (as far as I can tell). I don't think Mark wants to do it though, perhaps because of the way the serializer is implemented on their side. My personal feeling is that the serializer and unserializer in WebORB are misadapted to the realities of PHP, split into several classes for doing simple, computationally intensive things, but one could argue (and I'm sure that Mark would) that clarity of code was chosen over performance, a valid decision if it doesn't affect performance that much (and Mark is right, the 50-200ms difference won't really make a difference in most projects, but in some which have very high traffic it most definitely will, which is why the AMF extension was made). Patrick
[flexcoders] Re: WebORB or AMFPHP for big Application
It's a OpenSource project and it's better to use OpenSource solutions... You think WebORB will be only commercial in few years? The free PHP version is not usable for a big project? http://sourceforge.net/projects/timeline/ http://www.ideeclic.com/clients/133-cspi/v6/ --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, Sajid Hussain [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: WebOrb are just ready to show Thier commercial edition with DataManagment like Flex Data Services ,if u could buy that in future then go for weborb php else amfphp 1.9 seems also good and I hope not surely when but they realy shud do something more then RPC calls in it.amfphp is working with flash from good time Let me KNow which framework u r going to use for ur application I am also confused I tried for zend but it seems maybe have to go for cakeamf but current version dont work with amf 1.9 Thanks nxzone [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Which between these both do you prefer? Which want is more stable, fast, simple WebORB VS AMFPHP - Don't pick lemons. See all the new 2007 cars at Yahoo! Autos.
Re: [flexcoders] Re: WebORB or AMFPHP for big Application
Keep in mind that AMFPHP may go under the radar (or drop off it completely) as the lead developer has decided to pursue another career and I have not seen any announcement of anybody else taking over for him. Brian On 10 Apr 2007 06:57:44 -0700, nxzone [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's a OpenSource project and it's better to use OpenSource solutions... You think WebORB will be only commercial in few years? The free PHP version is not usable for a big project? http://sourceforge.net/projects/timeline/ http://www.ideeclic.com/clients/133-cspi/v6/ --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, Sajid Hussain [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: WebOrb are just ready to show Thier commercial edition with DataManagment like Flex Data Services ,if u could buy that in future then go for weborb php else amfphp 1.9 seems also good and I hope not surely when but they realy shud do something more then RPC calls in it.amfphp is working with flash from good time Let me KNow which framework u r going to use for ur application I am also confused I tried for zend but it seems maybe have to go for cakeamf but current version dont work with amf 1.9 Thanks nxzone [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Which between these both do you prefer? Which want is more stable, fast, simple WebORB VS AMFPHP - Don't pick lemons. See all the new 2007 cars at Yahoo! Autos. -- Brian Dunphy
[flexcoders] Re: WebORB or AMFPHP for big Application
WebORB for PHP is available as an open source and commercial product today and it will stay that way. There are no plans to stop the open source offering. On the contrary, we have grand plans for it later this year. Cheers, Mark --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, nxzone [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's a OpenSource project and it's better to use OpenSource solutions... You think WebORB will be only commercial in few years? The free PHP version is not usable for a big project? http://sourceforge.net/projects/timeline/ http://www.ideeclic.com/clients/133-cspi/v6/ --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, Sajid Hussain enchanter_saj@ wrote: WebOrb are just ready to show Thier commercial edition with DataManagment like Flex Data Services ,if u could buy that in future then go for weborb php else amfphp 1.9 seems also good and I hope not surely when but they realy shud do something more then RPC calls in it.amfphp is working with flash from good time Let me KNow which framework u r going to use for ur application I am also confused I tried for zend but it seems maybe have to go for cakeamf but current version dont work with amf 1.9 Thanks nxzone nxzone@ wrote: Which between these both do you prefer? Which want is more stable, fast, simple WebORB VS AMFPHP - Don't pick lemons. See all the new 2007 cars at Yahoo! Autos.
[flexcoders] Re: WebORB or AMFPHP for big Application
Sodo you suggest me to use WebORB for a big web application? WebORB is stable, fast, secure... ? --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, Mark Piller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: WebORB for PHP is available as an open source and commercial product today and it will stay that way. There are no plans to stop the open source offering. On the contrary, we have grand plans for it later this year. Cheers, Mark --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, nxzone nxzone@ wrote: It's a OpenSource project and it's better to use OpenSource solutions... You think WebORB will be only commercial in few years? The free PHP version is not usable for a big project? http://sourceforge.net/projects/timeline/ http://www.ideeclic.com/clients/133-cspi/v6/ --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, Sajid Hussain enchanter_saj@ wrote: WebOrb are just ready to show Thier commercial edition with DataManagment like Flex Data Services ,if u could buy that in future then go for weborb php else amfphp 1.9 seems also good and I hope not surely when but they realy shud do something more then RPC calls in it.amfphp is working with flash from good time Let me KNow which framework u r going to use for ur application I am also confused I tried for zend but it seems maybe have to go for cakeamf but current version dont work with amf 1.9 Thanks nxzone nxzone@ wrote: Which between these both do you prefer? Which want is more stable, fast, simple WebORB VS AMFPHP - Don't pick lemons. See all the new 2007 cars at Yahoo! Autos.
Re: [flexcoders] Re: WebORB or AMFPHP for big Application
WebORB, is really cool and easy, I love it, but I have to say too, that with the last releaseof AMFPHP, the performance is really good or better than WebORB. I changed the engine for AMFPHP beacuse hat better performance, I look forward for new enhanced that Mark and his team made in WebORB for PHP, Best, Guillermo 10 Apr 2007 09:22:30 -0700, Mark Piller [EMAIL PROTECTED]: WebORB for PHP is available as an open source and commercial product today and it will stay that way. There are no plans to stop the open source offering. On the contrary, we have grand plans for it later this year. Cheers, Mark --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com, nxzone [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's a OpenSource project and it's better to use OpenSource solutions... You think WebORB will be only commercial in few years? The free PHP version is not usable for a big project? http://sourceforge.net/projects/timeline/ http://www.ideeclic.com/clients/133-cspi/v6/ --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com, Sajid Hussain enchanter_saj@ wrote: WebOrb are just ready to show Thier commercial edition with DataManagment like Flex Data Services ,if u could buy that in future then go for weborb php else amfphp 1.9 seems also good and I hope not surely when but they realy shud do something more then RPC calls in it.amfphp is working with flash from good time Let me KNow which framework u r going to use for ur application I am also confused I tried for zend but it seems maybe have to go for cakeamf but current version dont work with amf 1.9 Thanks nxzone nxzone@ wrote: Which between these both do you prefer? Which want is more stable, fast, simple WebORB VS AMFPHP - Don't pick lemons. See all the new 2007 cars at Yahoo! Autos.
RE: [flexcoders] Re: WebORB or AMFPHP for big Application
Do you have any examples of your integration with amfphp and flex 2. thanks -Original Message- From: guillermo Pared [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com Sent: 4/10/07 1:44 PM Subject: Re: [flexcoders] Re: WebORB or AMFPHP for big Application WebORB, is really cool and easy, I love it, but I have to say too, that with the last releaseof AMFPHP, the performance is really good or better than WebORB. I changed the engine for AMFPHP beacuse hat better performance, I look forward for new enhanced that Mark and his team made in WebORB for PHP, Best, Guillermo 10 Apr 2007 09:22:30 -0700, Mark Piller [EMAIL PROTECTED]: WebORB for PHP is available as an open source and commercial product today and it will stay that way. There are no plans to stop the open source offering. On the contrary, we have grand plans for it later this year. Cheers, Mark --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com, nxzone [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's a OpenSource project and it's better to use OpenSource solutions... You think WebORB will be only commercial in few years? The free PHP version is not usable for a big project? http://sourceforge.net/projects/timeline/ http://www.ideeclic.com/clients/133-cspi/v6/ --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com, Sajid Hussain enchanter_saj@ wrote: WebOrb are just ready to show Thier commercial edition with DataManagment like Flex Data Services ,if u could buy that in future then go for weborb php else amfphp 1.9 seems also good and I hope not surely when but they realy shud do something more then RPC calls in it.amfphp is working with flash from good time Let me KNow which framework u r going to use for ur application I am also confused I tried for zend but it seems maybe have to go for cakeamf but current version dont work with amf 1.9 Thanks nxzone nxzone@ wrote: Which between these both do you prefer? Which want is more stable, fast, simple WebORB VS AMFPHP - Don't pick lemons. See all the new 2007 cars at Yahoo! Autos.
[flexcoders] Re: WebORB or AMFPHP for big Application
You can have some sample here: http://code.google.com/p/adobe-php-sdk/ # Adobe Spry Framework # WebORB for PHP # AMFPHP # SabreAMF --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, Agent RR-007 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Do you have any examples of your integration with amfphp and flex 2. thanks -Original Message- From: guillermo Pared [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com Sent: 4/10/07 1:44 PM Subject: Re: [flexcoders] Re: WebORB or AMFPHP for big Application WebORB, is really cool and easy, I love it, but I have to say too, that with the last releaseof AMFPHP, the performance is really good or better than WebORB. I changed the engine for AMFPHP beacuse hat better performance, I look forward for new enhanced that Mark and his team made in WebORB for PHP, Best, Guillermo 10 Apr 2007 09:22:30 -0700, Mark Piller [EMAIL PROTECTED]: WebORB for PHP is available as an open source and commercial product today and it will stay that way. There are no plans to stop the open source offering. On the contrary, we have grand plans for it later this year. Cheers, Mark --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com, nxzone nxzone@ wrote: It's a OpenSource project and it's better to use OpenSource solutions... You think WebORB will be only commercial in few years? The free PHP version is not usable for a big project? http://sourceforge.net/projects/timeline/ http://www.ideeclic.com/clients/133-cspi/v6/ --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com, Sajid Hussain enchanter_saj@ wrote: WebOrb are just ready to show Thier commercial edition with DataManagment like Flex Data Services ,if u could buy that in future then go for weborb php else amfphp 1.9 seems also good and I hope not surely when but they realy shud do something more then RPC calls in it.amfphp is working with flash from good time Let me KNow which framework u r going to use for ur application I am also confused I tried for zend but it seems maybe have to go for cakeamf but current version dont work with amf 1.9 Thanks nxzone nxzone@ wrote: Which between these both do you prefer? Which want is more stable, fast, simple WebORB VS AMFPHP - Don't pick lemons. See all the new 2007 cars at Yahoo! Autos.
Re: [flexcoders] Re: WebORB or AMFPHP for big Application
I recently changed over from weborb back to amfphp. amfphp1.9 with the server running the php amf plugin is definitely faster in my tests here. ymmv Impudent1 LeapFrog Productions
Re: [flexcoders] Re: WebORB or AMFPHP for big Application
Amfphp is realy goood and hopefully within few time ..we will have data services in it and I think weborb will miss this functionality Impudent1 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I recently changed over from weborb back to amfphp. amfphp1.9 with the server running the php amf plugin is definitely faster in my tests here. ymmv Impudent1 LeapFrog Productions - The fish are biting. Get more visitors on your site using Yahoo! Search Marketing.
Re: [flexcoders] Re: WebORB or AMFPHP for big Application
Hi Mark, That is true, AMFPHP with the native AMFText, is faster is great, but just a few providers offers this native serialization. In my test I used normal, AMFPHP Vs, WebOrb, because my provider don't offer to me the native serialization. I tell you I loved WebOrb, was cool and easy, vs the before version of AMFPHP with comics $MethodName... und so weiter... but now AMFPHP is more clear and better performance. I going to check againg my test, and I talk you when WebOrb, comming better, I changed againg for WebOrb. and made this public. I check (one by week) what's comming on in WebOrb. go ahead !!!, Viele Grüße, Guillermo 10 Apr 2007 12:58:12 -0700, Mark Piller [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Hi Guillermo, Are you talking about the release of AMFPHP that introduced native (C) AMF serialization? If that's the case, then obviously the implementation would be faster. However, in a real-world scenario does it really matter if the serialization time is 50ms vs. 200ms when the actual method invocation takes 2 seconds? :) Additionally, I heard people saying it is quite hard to find a hosting provider willing to deploy a custom native PHP module (which is what C serializer for AMFPHP is). Cheers, Mark --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com, guillermo Pared [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: WebORB, is really cool and easy, I love it, but I have to say too, that with the last releaseof AMFPHP, the performance is really good or better than WebORB. I changed the engine for AMFPHP beacuse hat better performance, I look forward for new enhanced that Mark and his team made in WebORB for PHP, Best, Guillermo 10 Apr 2007 09:22:30 -0700, Mark Piller [EMAIL PROTECTED]: WebORB for PHP is available as an open source and commercial product today and it will stay that way. There are no plans to stop the open source offering. On the contrary, we have grand plans for it later this year. Cheers, Mark --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com flexcoders%40yahoogroups.comflexcoders%40yahoogroups.com, nxzone nxzone@ wrote: It's a OpenSource project and it's better to use OpenSource solutions... You think WebORB will be only commercial in few years? The free PHP version is not usable for a big project? http://sourceforge.net/projects/timeline/ http://www.ideeclic.com/clients/133-cspi/v6/ --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com, Sajid Hussain enchanter_saj@ wrote: WebOrb are just ready to show Thier commercial edition with DataManagment like Flex Data Services ,if u could buy that in future then go for weborb php else amfphp 1.9 seems also good and I hope not surely when but they realy shud do something more then RPC calls in it.amfphp is working with flash from good time Let me KNow which framework u r going to use for ur application I am also confused I tried for zend but it seems maybe have to go for cakeamf but current version dont work with amf 1.9 Thanks nxzone nxzone@ wrote: Which between these both do you prefer? Which want is more stable, fast, simple WebORB VS AMFPHP - Don't pick lemons. See all the new 2007 cars at Yahoo! Autos.
Re: [flexcoders] Re: WebORB or AMFPHP for big Application
Keep in mind that AMFPHP may go under the radar (or drop off it completely) as the lead developer has decided to pursue another career and I have not seen any announcement of anybody else taking over for him. I'll be releasing amfphp 2 before I retire, and I have someone here that is interested in picking up amfphp, someone I can't mention just yet but trust me that my successor will be a very talented and respected member of the community that I am sure will do an awesome job with the project. As to which you should choose between amfphp and WebORB, it depends. Mark loves his WebORB, and I love amfphp, but they are different projects, and have different design goals, so that either one is most appropriate for different uses. The differences are subtle though, I'll be the first to admit, which is why I wasn't particularly thrilled about WebORB and SabreAmf when they first came out, as I felt it was a duplication of efforts (much like the well-publicized argument over SWX with Aral). But regardless, the effort has already been put in, so there's no use in stopping it now. I'll restate the design goals of amfphp from the homepage: - Nothing required - PHP4/PHP5 compatible, no extensions needed - Low footprint, lightweight, fast - Convention over configuration (service and class mapping) - Can be embedded into a framework (see CakeAmfphphttp://cakeforge.org/projects/cakeamfphp/, Seagull http://trac.seagullproject.org/ticket/1378) - Services are non-specific PHP classes that are portable to anything without code change - Productivity tools included (service browser, code gen, profiling) - Batteries included - XML-RPC, JSON - Not a framework by itself (use your own) I'd like if Mark could put up a similar statement of design goals for weborb so that users can make an informed decision. As for the issue of the AMF extension, I've contacted Mark about it, and in theory weborb could be made compatible, and SabreAMF will be eventually (as far as I can tell). I don't think Mark wants to do it though, perhaps because of the way the serializer is implemented on their side. My personal feeling is that the serializer and unserializer in WebORB are misadapted to the realities of PHP, split into several classes for doing simple, computationally intensive things, but one could argue (and I'm sure that Mark would) that clarity of code was chosen over performance, a valid decision if it doesn't affect performance that much (and Mark is right, the 50-200ms difference won't really make a difference in most projects, but in some which have very high traffic it most definitely will, which is why the AMF extension was made). Patrick
Re: [flexcoders] Re: WebORB or AMFPHP for big Application
just to note as well, my reason for switching back to amfphp originally was that I could not get weborb to work with apollo public beta. Impudent1 LeapFrog Productions
RE: [flexcoders] Re: WebORB or AMFPHP for big Application
2 seconds??? Is that really how long an average PHP method call is? We don't use PHP here but we aim for all method calls total being under 200ms and average a bit lower. 2 seconds for a remoting call seems extremely slow. Sam --- We're Hiring! Seeking a passionate developer to join our team building Flex based products. Position is in the Washington D.C. metro area. If interested contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Piller Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2007 3:58 PM To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com Subject: [flexcoders] Re: WebORB or AMFPHP for big Application Hi Guillermo, Are you talking about the release of AMFPHP that introduced native (C) AMF serialization? If that's the case, then obviously the implementation would be faster. However, in a real-world scenario does it really matter if the serialization time is 50ms vs. 200ms when the actual method invocation takes 2 seconds? :) Additionally, I heard people saying it is quite hard to find a hosting provider willing to deploy a custom native PHP module (which is what C serializer for AMFPHP is). Cheers, Mark
Re: [flexcoders] Re: WebORB or AMFPHP for big Application
is it realy better to use Frameworks with weborb php or amfphp .. with ORM and with VOs, TOs and DTOs ??? if yes then which will be best ? Impudent1 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: just to note as well, my reason for switching back to amfphp originally was that I could not get weborb to work with apollo public beta. Impudent1 LeapFrog Productions - It's here! Your new message! Get new email alerts with the free Yahoo! Toolbar.
Re: [flexcoders] Re: WebORB or AMFPHP for big Application
this ...Post is really awesome and very cleared for newbies like me . Patrick Mineault [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Keep in mind that AMFPHP may go under the radar (or drop off it completely) as the lead developer has decided to pursue another career and I have not seen any announcement of anybody else taking over for him. I'll be releasing amfphp 2 before I retire, and I have someone here that is interested in picking up amfphp, someone I can't mention just yet but trust me that my successor will be a very talented and respected member of the community that I am sure will do an awesome job with the project. As to which you should choose between amfphp and WebORB, it depends. Mark loves his WebORB, and I love amfphp, but they are different projects, and have different design goals, so that either one is most appropriate for different uses. The differences are subtle though, I'll be the first to admit, which is why I wasn't particularly thrilled about WebORB and SabreAmf when they first came out, as I felt it was a duplication of efforts (much like the well-publicized argument over SWX with Aral). But regardless, the effort has already been put in, so there's no use in stopping it now. I'll restate the design goals of amfphp from the homepage: Nothing required - PHP4/PHP5 compatible, no extensions needed Low footprint, lightweight, fast Convention over configuration (service and class mapping) Can be embedded into a framework (see CakeAmfphp, Seagull) Services are non-specific PHP classes that are portable to anything without code change Productivity tools included (service browser, code gen, profiling) Batteries included - XML-RPC, JSON Not a framework by itself (use your own) I'd like if Mark could put up a similar statement of design goals for weborb so that users can make an informed decision. As for the issue of the AMF extension, I've contacted Mark about it, and in theory weborb could be made compatible, and SabreAMF will be eventually (as far as I can tell). I don't think Mark wants to do it though, perhaps because of the way the serializer is implemented on their side. My personal feeling is that the serializer and unserializer in WebORB are misadapted to the realities of PHP, split into several classes for doing simple, computationally intensive things, but one could argue (and I'm sure that Mark would) that clarity of code was chosen over performance, a valid decision if it doesn't affect performance that much (and Mark is right, the 50-200ms difference won't really make a difference in most projects, but in some which have very high traffic it most definitely will, which is why the AMF extension was made). Patrick - Bored stiff? Loosen up... Download and play hundreds of games for free on Yahoo! Games.
