PHP is not doomed. But perhaps open source development of it is.
Read this today from Jeremy Privett “Is PHP Doomed?” Internal devs fighting over the future of the language could be construed negatively, but I don’t think it matters at all. Until someone starts talking about forking PHP, I think we’re on safe ground.
As an outsider, I wonder how much pull Zend has anyway, and whether or not PHP is being pulled in the direction they want it to go. Its not too far-fetched for them to get an agreement to just close the source. Aren’t most of the PHP devs working for either Zend or Yahoo at this point?
Besides, what kind of arguments do the internal devs in Redmond have over .NET? Oh that’s right. We aren’t really privy to that information.
I think there’s been an uptick recently in PHP adoption in the enterprise. How do I know that? Because I’ve gotten several job offers doing this very thing in the past 2 years. I’m now working at a 60 year old company, that works quite a bit with the government. We rely on PHP for quite a few internal apps. This is not some fly-by-night Web 2.0 outfit.
So, is PHP doomed? I don’t think so. And even if it is, Ruby’s not so bad ![]()
Share this via del.icio.us, digg, email, etc.
Trackback for "PHP is not doomed. But perhaps open source development of it is."
2 Responses to “PHP is not doomed. But perhaps open source development of it is.”
By Jeremy Privett on May 18, 2007 | Reply
Maybe “Is PHP Doomed?” was too strong of a title.
PHP itself is most certainly not doomed. The market share they hold is too great, at the moment. Like the boys at Redmond, they have a long way to fall and plenty of time to fix mistakes if they do start to fall. Granted, they know what mistakes need to be fixed.
The company I work at utilizes PHP on their major customer-facing applications, currently. And working very closely with .NET and Flex developers has allowed me to see some of the language’s shortcomings, besides just what’s been going on internally between the developers.
I’ll get my thoughts up on that, in a later entry, though.
Thanks for your input!