Re: Re: Protect PHP coding

I have been following this thread. First, I think the discussion is healthy. Everyone obviously cares about the state of PHP. I think it is good to discuss the big picture every now and then. Acer, I do not agree with your position that Zend is hurting PHP but you do make some valid points or concerns. Any commercial success for any company is good for me. I can then point to them as a reference. Much like Red Hat Linux and IBM's adoption of Linux, I can use Linux in conversations with my clients and with confidence. I remember in 1995 when I whispered that I used Linux. Now Linux is an commercially acceptable alternative to MIcrosoft. I think that success of Zend legitimizes PHP in the minds of some people. For some reason, many businesses and managers place value for things that they pay for or things that are hyped in media or advertising. Right or wrong that is the fact of things. BTW, I do wish they do drop the price of the encoder. That is their choice and I respect it. I am a bit concerned about the recent .Net developments. Microsoft has now launched the .Net framework to gain marketshare in Web services development. Mono, the open source .Net (www.go-mono.com) initiative, seems like a competitive alternative to PHP. I do not know what this means in the long term. But since you can complile and run on Linux or windows, it seems as though this is an effort to stop the bleeding of the ASP to PHP development migration. I think the PHP community is too large and strong to be affeected. But I am not sure how this will play out with Zend. Any thoughts... ----- Original Message ----- From: "Lee" <lee@unassemble.co.uk> To: <php-general@lists.php.net> Sent: Sunday, August 04, 2002 3:52 PM Subject: Re: [PHP] Re: Protect PHP coding > As someone who subscribed to this list for technical assistance, not to get > numerous posts of politics. I would like to add my piece which I hope will > help to end it hear. > > A lot of people have said the same thing over and over, its about CHOICE. > > You are not forced to use any off the commercial offering from zend at all, > but if you think they are useful then you have the option of purchasing > them. > > Can we try and put this into perspective:- > > If you were to try and setup a similair M$ setup for personal use, what > would you have to get > > + Windows 2000 server > + Visual Studio > + SQL Server > > Now consider a similair UNIX/Linux setup > > + Linux Flavor > + PHP > + Zend Studio Personal > + Mysql, PostgreSQL, Oracle8i, etc > > I haven't included prices because it is pretty obvious which one will be > more expensive. But the point I am trying to make is CHOICE again. With > Microsoft you have no choice but to use there setup, with others you do. > > Sorry if I have added an extra M$ vs Unix argument to this but I could > eventually see this argument spanning of control onto companies such as > RedHat (e.g. RedHat Advanced Server) and that is definately not right. > > Thanks for you time. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Maxim Maletsky" <maxim@php.net> > To: <mlemos@acm.org>; <php-general@lists.php.net> > Sent: Sunday, August 04, 2002 8:34 PM > Subject: RE: [PHP] Re: Protect PHP coding > > > > > so is the opinion of many other PHP users. The problem is not being > > > commercial, the problem is being expensive. > > > > This is true, but I think they know it. Their main customers are ready > > to pay those prices, so what's the problem? They've just chosen this > > business model for themselves. > > > > > I have an brain and use it to make decisions that defend my interests. > > > So it seems that Yahoo people that decided to use Nick Lindrige PHP > > > Accelerator instead of Zend Cache. > > > > > > > > > > There is really a lot of money involved in developments. If, by some > > > > means, I would need to hide a source, I would look at my business > > model, > > > > and, if I got extra $3.000 budgeted to spend on development I will > > spend > > > > them for Zend Encoder instead of resorting to Open Source protecting > > > > solutions. Because, the product to protect my intellectual property > > > > would be chosen by the responsibility of its manufacture. > > > > > > Maxim, be serious, you do not have to pay that sort of money to > > compile > > > programs in other languages, why do you keep forcing the excuse to pay > > > that fortune to Zend? > > > > $3.000 is a lot of money? For middle-range site maybe, but for big > > projects it is not. In fact, when you get to use Java or ASP.NET you, > > over all, will end up paying Waaaaay more money for the whole thing. > > > > > I am sure that many of us are not idiots to pay that fortune to Zend, > > > especially now when have free alternatives. > > > > > > > Now, here we're close to the point. Ideally, it should have both - > > commercial software and open source alternatives. > > > > Learning from Microsoft experience, lots of projects prefer commercial > > solutions. This way, having Zend doing it, we can compete. Otherwise, > > how on the earth MS with ASP would exist? > > > > > Honestly I don't want support from greedy companies like Zend. If you > > go > > > and examine their pricing you see that they charge for every little > > thing. > > > > > > The only thing that that don't charge is the Zend Optimizer. But the > > > truth is, if you have complex scripts, if you do not use a cache > > engine > > > as well, using Zend optimizer makes your scripts run slower because > > the > > > optimizer itself takes a lot of time to analyse complex scripts and in > > > the end often it does not pay using the optimizer if the results are > > not > > > cached. Make your benchmarks with complex scripts and you will see > > what > > > I am talking about. > > > > > > So, the only thing that is "free" from Zend is something that makes > > you > > > wish even more the cache product that is bloody expensive. It took me > > > some time to realize that. Some day I realized that some users were > > > using mirror scripts that made many requests to a site of mine and I > > > noticed that PHP was consuming an huge ammount of CPU time. I was > > > suggested by a open source cache extension developer that using the > > > optiomizer without a cache makes your PHP scripts hog the CPU. I > > turned > > > Zend Optimizer off and it turned out to be true. I never used Zend > > > Optimizer again. > > > > > > I use APC cache and the speedup is tremendous although it is said that > > > Nick Lindrige PHP Accelerator is much faster matching Zend Cache > > > performance. > > > > > > > Cannot comment on this one because I haven't had a similar experience. > > You might be right on this. > > > > > Of course, when you pay they will treat you nicely. It seems that when > > > you refuse to pay they become unreasonable. > > > > No, we weren't paying. > > > > > Sure, mine and of many others. I also think it is stupid to exclude > > Acer > > > because he has different opinions than yours. > > > > Manuel, read the whole thread well. Acer have insulted PHP community. It > > was not about his ideas, but rather about the way he put them like. > > > > > Anyway, do you agree that Zeev is right by boycotting APC people to > > > contribute with they cache extension? If you do, you are just > > defending > > > their monopoly, and so I do not have nothing else to say to you. > > > > Neither I know well this story. But, if the things went the ay you say > > then this is not very nice. Guess, soon or later it will change. > > However, free solutions can always become patches and be available to > > people. So the problem becomes only somewhat like "should we add it or > > should we not". Yet it is available. > > > > > Do you work for Zend? I'm sorry but it surely looks like you do > > because > > > you are trying are to make them look good. > > > > No, I never worked for them. When working in Tokyo's largest English IT > > publication we have met Zend on behalf of my ex-company. Besides that I > > only had PHP Beginner affiliated with Zend a year ago, but even that is > > over now. > > > > > > All I am trying to say, that, Zend plays a big role in PHP development. > > I, personally, do not mind about their pricing because I am not running > > any projects that need their services. I, just as you would, would get > > the alternatives whenever cannot afford their pricings. Actually, I > > would not buy Encoder even if it would cost $5 because I whether do it > > all with Open Source or plan the budget and pay. $3.000 is a lot for a > > simple project, but it is doable for an ASP (Application Service > > Providers), so let's let Zend live - we need it. > > > > One more though - I believe, that, even if encoder will be added to > > every PHP distribution, Zend will still be selling encoder because it > > would be able to support it as an entity. That's how a lot of businesses > > think. > > > > Maxim Maletsky > > > > > > -- > > PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) > > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php >