PHP and ASP.NET go HEAD to HEAD

PHP and ASP.NET Go Head-to-Head
By Sean Hull
http://otn.oracle.com/pub/articles/hull_asp.html


SUMMARY at the BOTTOM
Speed and efficiency. As I mentioned earlier, ASP.NET is a framework
allowing you to use various programming languages. In addition, it is touted
as having a great object-oriented model. All this is true, but it becomes a
detriment as far as speed is concerned. For all that advantage, there is a
lot more code to run through to execute the same ASP page than you have to
execute in the PHP engine for an equivalent PHP page. PHP is the
quick-and-dirty type of solution, the one to get the job done. And though a
lot of robustness has been added to it since its 2.0 and 3.0 days, it still
retains that core optimized high-speed approach.
Speed is not the only consideration. Memory usage is also important.



SECURITY COMPARISON
ASP.NET officially requires that you use IIS. Unfortunately, IIS has a long
history of vulnerabilities, which makes many administrators reluctant to
deploy it to handle their web site. Whether these weaknesses are because of
Microsoft's ineptness or because IIS is a real red flag to hackers is
irrelevant: Those systems have a history of being hacked and compromised.
PHP runs on Apache, too, which is fast and open source and has a good
security track record. Also, as I mentioned, Apache runs on many platforms.


So is PHP really faster than ASP.NET or is that for certain unoptimized
pages? And are they comparing this against the DataGrid instead of the
repeater control or even the fastest way using asp.net's inline code render
block, <% %>

comments?

Simon
Thu Jul 08 06:34:26 CDT 2004

Its a fair point, but to be fair the OO aspect is aimed at helping speed
development rather than speed execution. Most sites don't need blistering
speed and processors are getting faster and faster.

The speed issue is becoming less and less of an issue for the majority of
sites. I say this as a web host for many large sites including international
airports

Only one of our sites requires a dual 2.4 xeon machine

Our database server is also dual xeon.

Oh, and php is ugly imho

Let the flames begin

:-)

Patrice
Thu Jul 08 07:35:26 CDT 2004

The sad truth is that at some point you have to look at things against your
own requirements to make your own mind as you would do for choosing a car
(including both rational and unrelational arguments). That's life.

Patrice

--

"showme" <showme@hotmail.com> a écrit dans le message de
news:%23A4l%23xNZEHA.3692@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> PHP and ASP.NET Go Head-to-Head
> By Sean Hull
> http://otn.oracle.com/pub/articles/hull_asp.html
>
>
> SUMMARY at the BOTTOM
> Speed and efficiency. As I mentioned earlier, ASP.NET is a framework
> allowing you to use various programming languages. In addition, it is
touted
> as having a great object-oriented model. All this is true, but it becomes
a
> detriment as far as speed is concerned. For all that advantage, there is a
> lot more code to run through to execute the same ASP page than you have to
> execute in the PHP engine for an equivalent PHP page. PHP is the
> quick-and-dirty type of solution, the one to get the job done. And though
a
> lot of robustness has been added to it since its 2.0 and 3.0 days, it
still
> retains that core optimized high-speed approach.
> Speed is not the only consideration. Memory usage is also important.
>
>
>
> SECURITY COMPARISON
> ASP.NET officially requires that you use IIS. Unfortunately, IIS has a
long
> history of vulnerabilities, which makes many administrators reluctant to
> deploy it to handle their web site. Whether these weaknesses are because
of
> Microsoft's ineptness or because IIS is a real red flag to hackers is
> irrelevant: Those systems have a history of being hacked and compromised.
> PHP runs on Apache, too, which is fast and open source and has a good
> security track record. Also, as I mentioned, Apache runs on many
platforms.
>
>
> So is PHP really faster than ASP.NET or is that for certain unoptimized
> pages? And are they comparing this against the DataGrid instead of the
> repeater control or even the fastest way using asp.net's inline code
render
> block, <% %>
>
> comments?
>
>
>
>
>

Kevin
Thu Jul 08 08:52:05 CDT 2004

> comments?

Consider the source. Also note that a number of comparison criteria are
simply ignored, such as development speed/cost. The most expensive aspect of
development is the cost of developers (man-hours of dev time). While ASP.Net
consumes a large chunk of memory and processor, RAM is cheap; hardware is
cheap; programmers are expensive. ASP.Net is designed to give the
implementers a greater ROI. This is the bottom line when it comes to
software development. That is why Oracle is in so much trouble financially.
It costs more to use it.

--
HTH,
Kevin Spencer
.Net Developer
Microsoft MVP
Big things are made up
of lots of little things.

"showme" <showme@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:#A4l#xNZEHA.3692@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> PHP and ASP.NET Go Head-to-Head
> By Sean Hull
> http://otn.oracle.com/pub/articles/hull_asp.html
>
>
> SUMMARY at the BOTTOM
> Speed and efficiency. As I mentioned earlier, ASP.NET is a framework
> allowing you to use various programming languages. In addition, it is
touted
> as having a great object-oriented model. All this is true, but it becomes
a
> detriment as far as speed is concerned. For all that advantage, there is a
> lot more code to run through to execute the same ASP page than you have to
> execute in the PHP engine for an equivalent PHP page. PHP is the
> quick-and-dirty type of solution, the one to get the job done. And though
a
> lot of robustness has been added to it since its 2.0 and 3.0 days, it
still
> retains that core optimized high-speed approach.
> Speed is not the only consideration. Memory usage is also important.
>
>
>
> SECURITY COMPARISON
> ASP.NET officially requires that you use IIS. Unfortunately, IIS has a
long
> history of vulnerabilities, which makes many administrators reluctant to
> deploy it to handle their web site. Whether these weaknesses are because
of
> Microsoft's ineptness or because IIS is a real red flag to hackers is
> irrelevant: Those systems have a history of being hacked and compromised.
> PHP runs on Apache, too, which is fast and open source and has a good
> security track record. Also, as I mentioned, Apache runs on many
platforms.
>
>
> So is PHP really faster than ASP.NET or is that for certain unoptimized
> pages? And are they comparing this against the DataGrid instead of the
> repeater control or even the fastest way using asp.net's inline code
render
> block, <% %>
>
> comments?
>
>
>
>
>

Michael
Thu Jul 08 09:53:32 CDT 2004

I could not agree with you more Kevin.

Programmers are expensive (at least here in the USA) and computers are
inexpensive. I'd much rather crank out an entire site in half time time
with ASP.net than spend twice as much time getting the same result in PHP
that runs faster.

It's an ROI thing and a time-to-market thing.

Michael


"Kevin Spencer" <kspencer@takempis.com> wrote in message
news:%2361m2LPZEHA.3692@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> > comments?
>
> Consider the source. Also note that a number of comparison criteria are
> simply ignored, such as development speed/cost. The most expensive aspect
of
> development is the cost of developers (man-hours of dev time). While
ASP.Net
> consumes a large chunk of memory and processor, RAM is cheap; hardware is
> cheap; programmers are expensive. ASP.Net is designed to give the
> implementers a greater ROI. This is the bottom line when it comes to
> software development. That is why Oracle is in so much trouble
financially.
> It costs more to use it.
>
> --
> HTH,
> Kevin Spencer
> .Net Developer
> Microsoft MVP
> Big things are made up
> of lots of little things.
>
> "showme" <showme@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:#A4l#xNZEHA.3692@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> > PHP and ASP.NET Go Head-to-Head
> > By Sean Hull
> > http://otn.oracle.com/pub/articles/hull_asp.html
> >
> >
> > SUMMARY at the BOTTOM
> > Speed and efficiency. As I mentioned earlier, ASP.NET is a framework
> > allowing you to use various programming languages. In addition, it is
> touted
> > as having a great object-oriented model. All this is true, but it
becomes
> a
> > detriment as far as speed is concerned. For all that advantage, there is
a
> > lot more code to run through to execute the same ASP page than you have
to
> > execute in the PHP engine for an equivalent PHP page. PHP is the
> > quick-and-dirty type of solution, the one to get the job done. And
though
> a
> > lot of robustness has been added to it since its 2.0 and 3.0 days, it
> still
> > retains that core optimized high-speed approach.
> > Speed is not the only consideration. Memory usage is also important.
> >
> >
> >
> > SECURITY COMPARISON
> > ASP.NET officially requires that you use IIS. Unfortunately, IIS has a
> long
> > history of vulnerabilities, which makes many administrators reluctant to
> > deploy it to handle their web site. Whether these weaknesses are because
> of
> > Microsoft's ineptness or because IIS is a real red flag to hackers is
> > irrelevant: Those systems have a history of being hacked and
compromised.
> > PHP runs on Apache, too, which is fast and open source and has a good
> > security track record. Also, as I mentioned, Apache runs on many
> platforms.
> >
> >
> > So is PHP really faster than ASP.NET or is that for certain unoptimized
> > pages? And are they comparing this against the DataGrid instead of the
> > repeater control or even the fastest way using asp.net's inline code
> render
> > block, <% %>
> >
> > comments?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>

Henning
Thu Jul 08 12:11:07 CDT 2004

And only think of maintainability... PHP is more Write-Only code ;-)

Greetings,
Henning Krause
==========================
Visit my website: http://www.infinitec.de
Try my free Exchange Explorer: Mistaya
(http://www.infinitec.de/?page=products)


"Kevin Spencer" <kspencer@takempis.com> wrote in message
news:#61m2LPZEHA.3692@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> > comments?
>
> Consider the source. Also note that a number of comparison criteria are
> simply ignored, such as development speed/cost. The most expensive aspect
of
> development is the cost of developers (man-hours of dev time). While
ASP.Net
> consumes a large chunk of memory and processor, RAM is cheap; hardware is
> cheap; programmers are expensive. ASP.Net is designed to give the
> implementers a greater ROI. This is the bottom line when it comes to
> software development. That is why Oracle is in so much trouble
financially.
> It costs more to use it.
>
> --
> HTH,
> Kevin Spencer
> .Net Developer
> Microsoft MVP
> Big things are made up
> of lots of little things.
>
> "showme" <showme@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:#A4l#xNZEHA.3692@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> > PHP and ASP.NET Go Head-to-Head
> > By Sean Hull
> > http://otn.oracle.com/pub/articles/hull_asp.html
> >
> >
> > SUMMARY at the BOTTOM
> > Speed and