invidious3 Posted February 11, 2007 Share Posted February 11, 2007 I have been recently hit with the question of whether I should stick with PHP (I know a fair bit about it but clearly am more beginner than expert) or if I should try to pick up Ruby On Rails (I know very little of Ruby On Rails but I hear it is the new premier rapid development tool for web 2.0). I just wanted to get some opinions of what people think would be a better option in the future. Thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.josh Posted February 11, 2007 Share Posted February 11, 2007 You mentioned web 2.0. You must now die. Well, not really. But seriously... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trq Posted February 11, 2007 Share Posted February 11, 2007 There are frameworks around for PHP that are (IMO) comparable to that of RoR for ruby. If you already know PHP, why not stick it out a bit. Learning a new language will be inevitable eventually, but moving from language to language will get you nowhere fast. Stick with one until you feel limited by it or until a specific project requires you to learn another. Otherwise it just a case of 'The grass is always greener'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
invidious3 Posted February 11, 2007 Author Share Posted February 11, 2007 Thanks very much thorpe, you put it very well. Thank you so much. I think you are completely right. The grass is always greener. Might as well stick with what you know for now and I'm sure there is so much more I can do with PHP than I currently can since, as I said previously, I'm a complete n00b. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel0 Posted February 11, 2007 Share Posted February 11, 2007 If you are already learning PHP, then why not just stick with it instead of having to learn Ruby? Also, you cannot compare PHP with RoR. PHP is a language, RoR is a framework. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jessica Posted February 11, 2007 Share Posted February 11, 2007 If you already know Ruby, then learn RoR. If you already know PHP, use PHP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steelmanronald06 Posted February 12, 2007 Share Posted February 12, 2007 if you know ruby then RoR if you know php then CakePHP Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bilis_money Posted February 12, 2007 Share Posted February 12, 2007 yeah, i also agree with them stick with PHP or choose one. Or master either of them before you migrate. Beside PHP is almost 10 years old, while ROR I think is 3 years old? PHP has bigger community than ROR. But if you ask me what i liked? I liked PHP & JAVA it's a cool combination. but i haven't mastered PHP first so i will not migrate to JAVA. Master it first before you migrate. //this is my advice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steelmanronald06 Posted February 12, 2007 Share Posted February 12, 2007 I'm just now at a stage where I dare call myself slightly-skilled at PHP, and I have been working with it for 3 years. In fact, I want to learn Ruby, but I have been putting it off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zq29 Posted February 12, 2007 Share Posted February 12, 2007 Asking this on a PHP forum might return some slightly bias answers... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marcreidy Posted February 12, 2007 Share Posted February 12, 2007 Okay ....well I have an alternative framework (ok this is a bit of an ad but there's value is what I'm going link to) Its called the sniPEAR framework and its a component based framework There are tutorials on http://anywheretogether.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=14&Itemid=35 It supports web2.0 (there I said it) and events etc. Sure check out the tutorials for quick look and see what you think. Cheers Marc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jessica Posted February 12, 2007 Share Posted February 12, 2007 "It supports web2.0" Wtf does that mean? Web 2.0 isn't something that can be "supported" - it's a buzzword. It's a design theme focusing on simplistic, childish layouts and colors with gradients and rounded corners, big buttons, and star-badges, never ending public beta, a focus on user-driven content, "angel" funding for ideas that simply add on to existing products, and hype. How can a framework "support" that? I happen to really like the look of the Web 2.0 style-sites, and some of the ideas coming out of the theme are cool. Most of them are people trying to jump on a bandwagon with their startup. How the heck does a framework support that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redbullmarky Posted February 12, 2007 Share Posted February 12, 2007 ...it's a buzzword. It's a design theme focusing on simplistic, childish layouts and colors with gradients and rounded corners, big buttons, and star-badges, never ending public beta, a focus on user-driven content, "angel" funding for ideas that simply add on to existing products, and hype... ...Most of them are people trying to jump on a bandwagon with their startup.... that is possibly the best description for Web 2.0 i have ever heard. ever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marcreidy Posted February 12, 2007 Share Posted February 12, 2007 Well maybe if you had some manners and took the time to look at the tutorial you might see how it is supported. I'll try simplify it for you though...Web 2.0 (as I would explain it) is the ability of web pages to get only the relevant content upon a page request and not re-render the whole page. My framework is designed to only retrieve and re-draw the changed components. So lets say you have a web page and on it you only change the contents of a div then only the div will be retrieved from the server and the browser will only re-draw the div. So simple I suspect you might even grasp it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel0 Posted February 12, 2007 Share Posted February 12, 2007 Web 2.0 (as I would explain it) is the ability of web pages to get only the relevant content upon a page request and not re-render the whole page. No it isn't. And because you think so it doesn't make it right. If I define PHP as a person wearing a green t-shirt and pink jeans living on the second floor in an apartment with five floors and who has has six couches and a laptop with a 60" monitor, then it doesn't mean that PHP is that. What you define as Web 2.0 is the use of XmlHttpRequest in JavaScript - and if you want a buzz word for that as well, then it is "AJAX". Info about "Web 2.0" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marcreidy Posted February 12, 2007 Share Posted February 12, 2007 Web2.0 and ajax are interchanged so much these days they mean the same thing. This is a petty arguement that you are having with me here. Like the effort that went into your angry posts trying (unsuccessfully) to be funny is just pathetic. What are you guys the gurus/genious of anyway? Pompus spouting is all I'm reading. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marcreidy Posted February 12, 2007 Share Posted February 12, 2007 Actually you should read that wiki you mentioned (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web2.0) Check out the "Technology overview" and you will find that I am right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balmung-San Posted February 12, 2007 Share Posted February 12, 2007 Web2.0 and ajax are interchanged so much these days they mean the same thing. This is a petty arguement that you are having with me here. Like the effort that went into your angry posts trying (unsuccessfully) to be funny is just pathetic. What are you guys the gurus/genious of anyway? Pompus spouting is all I'm reading. Just because they're interchanged does not mean their the same thing. Web 2.0 AJAX Read, and learn the difference, especially since AJAX is a characteristic of Web 2.0 And really, all I see from you is a person who can't be bothered to read fact that would prove your ideas wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel0 Posted February 12, 2007 Share Posted February 12, 2007 Web2.0 and ajax are interchanged so much these days they mean the same thing. This is a petty arguement that you are having with me here. Like the effort that went into your angry posts trying (unsuccessfully) to be funny is just pathetic. What are you guys the gurus/genious of anyway? Pompus spouting is all I'm reading. Right... AJAX may be a significant thing in "Web 2.0", but it doesn't mean it is the same. A motherboard is important in computers, but a motherboard isn't a computer. Actually you should read that wiki you mentioned (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web2.0) Check out the "Technology overview" and you will find that I am right. I think you missed the word "optionally" in front of "Ajax-based" as well as the nine other points. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marcreidy Posted February 12, 2007 Share Posted February 12, 2007 Sure just google "ajax web2.0" and you will see that they are interchanged so much that whether ajax is a characteristic or not they still mean the same thing to most people. Jeez you guys are hard work Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balmung-San Posted February 12, 2007 Share Posted February 12, 2007 Sure just google "ajax web2.0" and you will see that they are interchanged so much that whether ajax is a characteristic or not they still mean the same thing to most people. Jeez you guys are hard work I think you're the hard work here. The fact is, just because it's done doesn't mean it's right. For example, if you called a gorilla a monkey I'd bet you'd quickly be corrected by whomever studies monkies (would that be zoologists? [spelling?]). Or even better, if you called a tiger a kitten, would that mean he couldn't kill you as quickly? The thing is, if at least you can learn the difference, then maybe it would be used less interchangably Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel0 Posted February 12, 2007 Share Posted February 12, 2007 Sure just google "ajax web2.0" and you will see that they are interchanged so much that whether ajax is a characteristic or not they still mean the same thing to most people. Jeez you guys are hard work Well... I've heard a lot of people defining the internet as typing "www."+something in the address bar in Internet Explorer... What many people think isn't necessarily correct. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marcreidy Posted February 12, 2007 Share Posted February 12, 2007 lol. Web2.0/Ajax...like get over it, the world understands where I'm coming from...you do too but obviously I've hit a nerve. As my first abuser said...they are just buzz words.... and I've as much right to use them as anyone and will continue to spread the word....same same..(but different)...but still same same Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jessica Posted February 12, 2007 Share Posted February 12, 2007 Daniel, that's not how you use get to the internet. Everyone knows you open AOL and go to Yahoo and type in the URL there. Gosh. :-P I can say that my application supports input from USB and Apple Pie, but unless people agree on a meaning for Apple Pie it doesn't make sense. AJAX != Web 2.0. You seem to think they are interchangeable and they're not. That's like saying PHP and LAMP are interchangeable. PHP is a PART of Lamp, and an OPTIONAL one, as you can have LAMP systems with Python or Perl. The "world" won't understand what you mean because MOST people don't even know what Web 2.0 means - because it doesn't really mean anything. Saying your framework supports AJAX makes sense, and thus sounds much more professional. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redbullmarky Posted February 12, 2007 Share Posted February 12, 2007 Web 2.0 is a term most commonly used by people who jump on all the "media coined" bandwagon terms. Like those who fit "weapons of mass destruction" into a normal conversation. grrr AJAX on the other hand is a purposeful, non-general technology. OldLadiesAtTheBusStop Syndrome I like to call it. "Oohh have you heard about that surfing the email lark the kids get up to these days? In my day, the only web we had kept my hair tidy when i went t'bed. Ooooh, and those weapons of mass destruction." marcreidy, no one's abusing you dude - just giving you some education and putting your terms straight. It's all good. I invented my own term, Web something or other, but I can't remember what the version number was. Oh well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.