From: Robert Oliver <rwoliver2@...>
Date: 2005-07-17T05:46:36+09:00
Subject: Re: Ruby VS PHP

------=_Part_496_13731161.1121546720390
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

On 7/16/05, Dominik Schl=FCtter <schlu-do@gmx.net> wrote:
>=20
>=20
> I think there's a lot of prejudice in that field. There are people
> building high-traffic websites using PHP, and I think it scales at least
> as good as "Ruby on Rails" (as you can use the same methods for
> distributing your server load). There's also commercial support
> available from Zend <http://www.zend.com/>.


I agree with this. PHP scales quite well. In fact, in my experience, it did=
=20
better performance wise than RoR pre v.13. But the benefits that RoR brings=
=20
on development are worth the extra server resources IMHO ;)=20

And last but not least it's still much easier to find a web hoster who
> supports PHP (with database bindings etc.) than to get support for Ruby
> or even Rails. The latter is changing, though - but at least here in
> Germany there's still a long way to go.


Hopefully this is improving. We offer full RoR and Ruby support, and I know=
=20
some others are too. The thing is though, most web hosts have a "If Cpanel=
=20
doesn't have a checkbox for it we don't offer it" attitude. Partially this=
=20
is due to lack of experience on the part of alot of server admins of alot o=
f=20
smaller web hosting companies.

--=20

Robert W. Oliver II
CEO / President - OCS Solutions, Inc.
http://www.ocssolutions.com/

------=_Part_496_13731161.1121546720390--