|
|
Posted by Chung Leong on 05/05/06 02:29
Andy Jeffries wrote:
> Then I think you have a deep seated issue in that you need someone to
> blame when things go wrong.
Try telling that to your boss after your recommendation has costed the
company half a mil :-)
> When the stakes are "high" (which is a relative term from business to
> business) then the consultant should recommend the best solution.
And the best solution in that case is one that has the lowest risk.
Using PHP in a system that's mission critical for your business is a
high risk proposition--both from a objective and selfish,
save-my-own-ass perspective. For one thing, there are no patches for
PHP. To plug a hole or fix a bug you have to do a point upgrade.
Quality control is substandard, with debilitating regressions creeping
into released versions. And when these bugs are discovered, barely any
effort is made to inform the user base of their existence.
> For web applications 9 out of 10 times (if not more) PHP is the best
> solution and I have no issue recommending it even though there's no one to
> pin the blame on if it goes wrong.
I don't disagree, but the tenth is the one that the OP is looking for.
> Think of it this way, ask the customer "which would you prefer: a
> platform with someone to blame when it all goes wrong or a platform that
> actually works?"
As a government employee, I say the former is preferable. LOL
But seriously, in all business decisions one has to weight the
potential rewards against the risks involved. To say that a switch to
PHP is good because so-and-so big-shot company is using it is as silly
as to say the switch shouldn't be made because so-and-so isn't using it.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|