I feel that I would have to break down each Technology and pit them against each other, so here is how I will begin.

ASP.NET/C# VS Zend/PHP

1.       ASP.NET has the .NET Framework while PHP has nothing like it.

a.       .NET Framework has Two main parts:

                                                               i.      Common Language Runtime(CLR): The CLR can run code written in any language that’s adapted to .NET (VB.NET, J# and C#) it can run on any operating system that has a version of the CLR. Like Java that doesn’t have to be written in Java.

                                                             ii.      A hierarchical set of class libraries (Think PHP functions + the PEAR libraries and it extends them a lot, and have them organized in a nicer hierarchical structure). Included in those class libraries are ASP.NET (templating system), ADO.NET (a data access system), Windows Forms (classes for building windows apps), XML/XSLT frameworks (Code Generation), WCF (Built-in Web Services), Expression Framework Classes (Designer Framework), WF (Workflow Framework)

b.      ASP.NET uses a templating system on steroids called Web Forms which uses its runat=”server” attribute which gives you server side controls. Which run on the server giving you many more events, more possibility and more security. There is DaDaBIK but it doesn’t come anywhere close.

Performance Tests

c.       This person used the .NET Framework in C# Mono, but they are the same.
http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp4/benchmark.php?test=all&lang=csharp&lang2=php

2.       Speed

a.       .NET languages are static typed meaning they are compiled into assemblies making them 2/3 time faster than PHP, whose applications are interpreted. To achieve the same effect with PHP, Zend and PHP accelerator must be installed on the server. I’ve done this and ran performance tests and ASP.NET is still faster by a large margin. Also OOP is much faster in ASP.NET than it is in PHP.

b.      For Performance Speeds on C#: http://dada.perl.it/shootout/csharp.html

c.       For PHP: http://dada.perl.it/shootout/php.html

d.       

3.       More Language Support

a.       ASP.NET is written using "real" OO (Object Oriented) programming languages of your choice. PHP is just a simple scripting language in comparison to .NET languages like C++, VB.NET or C#.

4.       Much better Development Environment

a.       Visual Studio has multiple Integrated Development Environements (IDE’s) for the different roles you play in development (Database Admin, Tester, Developer, Project Manager, Business Analyst). Just a few of the things you can do:

                                                               i.      Automatically create reports and diagrams from your database

                                                             ii.      Debug the code line by line, while at the same time seeing what happens in the application as well as typing in a command window a variable and seeing what the results of that variable is, or calling a function in the command window.

                                                            iii.      Assign temporary value to variables in the middle of execution, in order to test out different scenarios.

                                                           iv.      Hover the cursor over variables in your code while debugging, to see what value they have “right now”

5.       It’s Part of .NET

a.       ASP.NET is a part of .NET, and that benefit is too large to simply ignore. If you know how to write ASP.NET applications, you know how to write ordinary applications too. Even windows apps, if you read up a little on the Windows Forms classes (as opposed to the Web Forms). PHP has PHP-GTK, but it's currently very immature compared to .NET.

6.       Reusable Codebase from Performance Pro 2

a.       If there is anything we want to use from Performance Pro 2 that we don’t really need to change, we have only to add the .asp file or files wrap it up in a COM Component and ASP.NET can access it and use it as if the code was already written. We can’t wrap the original codebase in PHP without rewriting it.

7.       At this point it’s cheaper

a.       We have the licenses for all the server software, the hardware for at least half of everything we need as well as the developers of strong skill sets already in house. We spend a lot of money already towards consultants for .NET and put a lot of effort into designing Performance Pro 3 for ASP.NET. If we go the other route we need to hire more experts, other developers, new hardware, new software. Most companies move from MySQL to Oracle as they grow and Oracle is very expensive.

Most PHP developers end up just justifying themselves by stating well I’m capable of building this feature or that feature. It’s a programming language of course you can build it. They also state there is this and that company that does it. But that costs more money, while these things are built into .NET. The difference is in productivity, we move to market faster, and the application performs better using the right technologies.

Here’s another link to Benefits of .NET Framework that I’m not even listing:

http://www.tometasoftware.com/benefits_of_net.asp

MSSQL VS MySQL (7 Reasons to Use SQL Server)

1.       Full Server Side Integration

a.       Full server side integration with the .NET Framework (LINQ to SQL , LINQ to XML)

2.       SQL Server has much much more advanced features over MySQL

a.       SQL Server just flat out has more advanced features then MySQL. SQL Server is a Sybased-derived Engine and Microsoft has just focused on using and expanding that infrastructure. MySQL is an open storage engine which uses InnoDb, BerkleyDB, MyISAM and Heap. Which they have struggled with design because of these multiple choices.

3.       XML is a native type within SQL Server

a.       Allows a DBA to modify an XML doc within the DBMS environment, query the document and validate it against XML schemas without having to DB Program it.

4.       Cheaper

a.       We are already have a SQL Server 2005 Enterprise Edition x86. Bought and purchased. MySQL AB would us more money.

5.       Security

a.       SQL Server 2005 has been certified as C-2 compliant and fully supports security at the column level. It also supports native encryption and obfuscat’s(intentionally, very hard to read and understand) the DBA from writing user-defined functions using column encryption APIs. A DBA also has the choice of specifying his own user-defined security functions through the encryption facility implemented in the .NET Framework

b.       MySQL has basic security at the table level and has no such certifications.

6.       Recovery

a.       SQL Server is more failsafe and less prone to data corruption. They have robust  checkpoint mechanisms, enhanced data protection, rapid restorations, Mirrored backups and partial backups instead of sorting through entire full backups.

b.      MySQL falls short with a default MyISAM mechanism. The UPS assumes uninterrupted data, and in the event of an unexpected shutdown your data can be lost and the data store corrupted.

7.       Most move to SQL Server or Oracle anyway

a.       Through my experience most move away from MySQL anyway because it just doesn’t meet the demands of today’s very rich artifacts of data. Such as (Media, Pictures, Audio, XML etc)

This would be considered a persuasive argument for those of you that take the critical thinking or english classes that teach it. ^_^

Whiplash

I want to identify a major problem I see with companies that are spiraling out of control. So feel free to add this to your Risk Analysis.

History

Big Bad Wolf Company is a company of 70 employees. They have a cash burn of 550k a month. The company has been in the red for 5 years and they have 250 customers. They offer an online patient portal system for clinics and hospitals to track Electronic Health Records. The company has so many bugs in the system that the developers can only afford to do High Critical or High issues with virtually almost no time to develop anything new.

Big Bad Wolf Company was targeting a niche market and was ever changing its company strategy. In any business you run it’s important to be able to shift your company strategy to meet the demands of any industry. Many successful companies of today have done this and if they had not, then they would have gone out of business or they would have stayed in the “living dead” category. (Where business just make enough to plateau but no longer have any growth.)

What fixed the problem of Big Bad Wolf and made them a successful company?

Problem:

The Executive team continually shifted strategy every three months, they continued to bring in a new COO who had his/her own ideas about where the company should and shouldn’t go. During which time each COO came in, assessed the company problems, proposed new solutions which included new technologies to get them from “here” to “there”. So begins the hiring of new employees with these skillsets and conversion of older products to meet the demand and fill in the gaps of the new products. Old time employees became obsolete except to maintain the “legacy” system, Managers were retrained towards the new strategy, etc.

Bottom line: If you find that every project you start at your company never gets finished and you continually start a new one and then a new one. You might be living the world of Big Bad Wolf Company.

Here is an image of a company’s strategy and how it flows:

As you can see the plan is made by the executive team with them in the middle of the company. The plan flows out to each member until finally reaching the developer. The waterfall effect: Executive à Middle Manager à Business Expert à Developer.

I apologize for my crud drawing as I didn’t want to put all my time into the image. There is more to the process then just my titles I’ve listed here but everybody pretty much breaks down into these categories. (From my perspective).

Later the company changes strategies and the image might look like this:

The open arrows represent the new strategy. But as you can see there is a disconnect between middle management and the business expert, which in turn affects the developer.  Given only one strategy change this might not be as bad of an issue as you think. But as time goes by and more strategies are introduced the employees on the outside of this image get the Whiplash from the changes.

So as a saying that I’ve picked up in the industry is this:

“If you ever find yourself in a hole….Stop Digging!”

Solution Ideas:

1.  Foster Open Communication: Make sure the left hand knows what the right hand is doing.
2.  Buy into a Common Vision: Make sure that your team has cohesion and everybody knows what they are doing on the project and what other people are doing on the project. Make sure they all buy into and understand the needs.
3.  Accountability and Responsibility: It’s way too easy in today’s workforce to “ride” on the wings of others. Each team member should be defined in what role they are to play for the vision.
4. Expect Change: understand that change is going to happen and plan for it, you can do this by risk analysis meetings.
5. Push for Quality: Quality is relative, each day a product or service could be getting better or worse. But it will never stand still
6. Learn: “Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”