|
yes, for IIS,
Download and read the documentation in:
http://www.php.net
http://www.php.net/docs.php
http://www.php.net/do_download.php?download_file=php-4.2.0-Win32.zip
Fernando Finelli
|
|
|
|
|
Just downlaod and run the PHP installer. It will detect the default web servers running and integrate automatically.
Nish
Check out last week's Code Project posting stats presentation from :-
http://www.busterboy.org/codeproject/
Feel free to make your comments.
|
|
|
|
|
So, PHP is much better than ASP? aint there anything ASP can do better than PHP?
thanks
|
|
|
|
|
Most servers i've checked out cost about twice the price for Windows...
ASP costs more than PHP/Perl would.
You can use COM objects from ASP, I dunno if you can do the same from PHP even running under windows.
Everybody knows Basic...so there's less of a learning curve for learning ASP. Having the ability to use COM is pretty exciting...to me anyways...if you know VC++ and ATL just think of the possibilities...*drool*
Just my opinion though
Cheers!
"An expert is someone who has made all the mistakes in his or her field" - Niels Bohr
|
|
|
|
|
Lol, I guess it is an advertisement of PHP?
I didn't find nothing in your words that I can't apply to ASP also, sorry. You sounds like an advertisement guy which sells PHP, lol
ASP running on Windows, Linux and UNIX also.
ASP is simple (in case of VBScript - very simple)
Secure? Are you guaranting 100% security? I don't believe
VBScript is class oriented also (well, kinda, not all options of OOP available). I actually dunno nothing about OOP support in PHP, so I'll better shut up here 
....
etc.
Only one thing I can think currently why PHP is better, that PHP script compiled only once (first time executed) and ASP compiling everytime the page requested. Actually never interested if this is right, just heard from someone.
Other ideas?
Philip Patrick
Web-site: www.stpworks.com
"Two beer or not two beer?" Shakesbeer
Need Web-based database administrator? You already have it!
|
|
|
|
|
Oh and forgot one thing... Open source doesn't mean the best. Usually it is otherwise Look at Linux. Fully open source OS... With my respect to programmers, I can't say it is better than Windows.
Using Linux is very non-comfortable.
Programming for Linux can lead to headaches. Documentation couldn't b found easy
Bugs? Well, noone is interested searching bugs in Linux, because who cares?
So the actual answer on question "why everyone is saying that Windows bad and Linux rules" is very simple. Remember guys those DOS days when user calls you everytim he needs to do something, and you feel like God, because you know something that he doesn't know? So some guys still stacked there, and just can't belive they don't rule anymore, that user can simple click "Next->Next->Next" and install a new program. It hurts And this is the answer
Philip Patrick
Web-site: www.stpworks.com
"Two beer or not two beer?" Shakesbeer
Need Web-based database administrator? You already have it!
|
|
|
|
|
Philip Patrick wrote:
Remember guys those DOS days when user calls you everytim he needs to do something, and you feel like God, because you know something that he doesn't know?
I'd have to dis-agree...
Sure Windows is a push over compared to DOS command prompt, but when peoples computers throw an exception and only show a bunch of hex codes and I explain what "might" have gone wrong and offer a fix via a d/l patch...I still feel like a god. 
I think there is more opportunity to feel god like today than back then. There is so much more to go wrong...
I'm a total windows guy...but Win2k hosts cost so much more....it sux...So i've often considered switching to PHP, cuz it'd be cheaper
Cheers!
"An expert is someone who has made all the mistakes in his or her field" - Niels Bohr
|
|
|
|
|
Well, I dunno, I'm looking at this from other point. Not how much you can do, but how much the user can do. On Windows, they can do many things and even understand what they are doing (a lot of "do" in my sentence, not? sorry ), specially in cases "Next->Next->Next" 
But on DOS... There is no way to user to understand what he is doing at all (except Doom  maybe)
That what I mean.... Dunno if what I wrote understandable... i just woke up
Philip Patrick
Web-site: www.stpworks.com
"Two beer or not two beer?" Shakesbeer
Need Web-based database administrator? You already have it!
|
|
|
|
|
Philip Patrick wrote:
Only one thing I can think currently why PHP is better, that PHP script compiled only once (first time executed) and ASP compiling everytime the page requested. Actually never interested if this is right, just heard from someone.
AFAIK both are interpreted languages.
James
Simplicity Rules!
|
|
|
|
|
PHP is still a developing language.
You better wait a while.
Recently I ported some ASP to PHP and I was horrified to find there is no PHP equivalent of Response.Redirect.
Means you can redirect from the server side. The only solution was to put some dummy html and javascript and do a client side html based redirect on the document load event.
Nish
Check out last week's Code Project posting stats presentation from :-
http://www.busterboy.org/codeproject/
Feel free to make your comments.
|
|
|
|
|
There is, but you can't buffer the response in PHP. If you're going to redirect, you have to do it before *anything* is sent to the browser.
header("Location: yourpage.php");
Jon Sagara
"Did you bring the butfor?"
"What's a butfor?"
"To poop with, silly."
|
|
|
|
|
Jon Sagara wrote:
header("Location: yourpage.php");
This is NOT a server redirect. It sends a redirect url in the html header and it is the browser that redirects to the new page. Sometimes you actually want server redirects.
Nish
Check out last week's Code Project posting stats presentation from :-
http://www.busterboy.org/codeproject/
Feel free to make your comments.
|
|
|
|
|
In what cases? And please clarify for me: what is the difference between Response.redirect "page.asp" and the PHP version? Does ASP do something special on the server side?
Jon Sagara
"Did you bring the butfor?"
"What's a butfor?"
"To poop with, silly."
|
|
|
|
|
Response.redirect will not send anything to the http client. It starts execution of the new asp and the new asp sends data to the http client.
In the php version the header thing sends data to the http client which then requests the new page.
Nish
Check out last week's Code Project posting stats presentation from :-
http://www.busterboy.org/codeproject/
Feel free to make your comments.
|
|
|
|
|
OIC. Yeah, I have to agree, that's pretty ghetto on the part of PHP.
Jon Sagara
"Did you bring the butfor?"
"What's a butfor?"
"To poop with, silly."
|
|
|
|
|
Use ASP.NET instead. You can use C#, it's compiled before it runs, you have access to the entire .NET framework and it's fast.
If you really want speed then look at ATL Server. You get to use ATL to program web pages. sweet!
cheers,
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Totally agree.
I've used both ASP and PHP, mainly because my old web host was Linux based (I'm a student -- hence a cheapskate  With traditional PHP and ASP there's not much reason to go with ASP, other than when using Windows you can call COM objects etc. PHP offered quite a lot of basic functionality (ability to do sockets programming and the like). To do anything like that in classic ASP you had to look to COM objects.
With ASP.NET its a whole different ball game, you suddenly have the capability of the entire .NET framework (or almost) at your fingertips.
To me personally ASP.NET beats PHP hands down for the reasons that Chris makes.
C#'s syntax is so much nicer, especially compared to VBScript with classic ASP.
Oh, and code-behind is fantastic! Not to mention Xcopy deployment
|
|
|
|
|
well i decided to install win2k server instead of win2k pro and now all my asp stuff is working exactly as it should
wtf is that win2k pro iis whatever crap all about???
nearly drove me mad
situations to avoid #37:
"good morning ... how many sugars do you take in your coffee ... and what was your name again?"
coming soon: situations to avoid #38: "...and the dog was there too?"
|
|
|
|
|
Well, congratulations
BTW, I have Win2k Pro with IIS installed and have no problems. I think it is just a bad luck
Philip Patrick
Web-site: www.stpworks.com
"Two beer or not two beer?" Shakesbeer
Need Web-based database administrator? You already have it!
|
|
|
|
|
I don't think all the extensions are installed by default in the version of IIS that came with the Pro version. I had to manually install the Front Page extensions in the Pro version to get InterDev to work at all, but it fired right up on my server machine.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Lauren
I have run IIS on Win2K pro for several months without any problems. Maybe you just got a round of bad luck
Nish
Check out last week's Code Project posting stats presentation from :-
http://www.busterboy.org/codeproject/
Feel free to make your comments.
|
|
|
|
|
Is this APS.NET...?
"An expert is someone who has made all the mistakes in his or her field" - Niels Bohr
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, MS has an 'X' fetish 
James
Simplicity Rules!
|
|
|
|
|
I have an access DB runnning most of my site (PWS right now, hopefully sqlServer(IIS) soon).
I was looking into incorporating secure login (using cookies) but I'm not sure I want to go that route, so I decided against secure login for now (I only needed to let myself login in order to add items daily to a list on my site). The database doesn't exactly hold any secret data, but i will in the future incorporate secure login. Even just because it is cool.
Anyways...What are the steps I should perform to insure a secure database in the future...?
Someone suggested I need to change the DSN instead of useing a hardcoded path...???
Currently it looks like this:
Dim DB
Set DB = Server.CreateObject ("ADODB.Connection")
DB.Open ("Provider=Microsoft.Jet.OLEDB.3.51;Data Source=" + "C:\sitedata.mdb")
I'm then suppose to put the database in a secure directory and use a mapped DSN somehow...?
Whats this mean..?
Also...this DB is getting big...and will only get bigger with time...the reason I wanted secure login was to allow myself to update and modify data remotely via webpage.
Seeing how I scapped the secure login...I can't update the records this way anymore, so i'm wondering if there is another approach...or is it back to the old drawing boards...?
Do I have to use secure login...? Or are there utilities out there that can do this for me...?
Thanx a bunch!
"An expert is someone who has made all the mistakes in his or her field" - Niels Bohr
|
|
|
|
|
Hockey wrote:
I'm then suppose to put the database in a secure directory and use a mapped DSN somehow...?
A DSN is just some registry keys that knowledgable programs (ADO for instance) can use to retreive the required settings to access the data source.
You should see a Data Sources applet somewhere in the control panel, on Win2K and XP it is under Administrative Tools. From there you can create a DSN so that you only need to specify the DSN name to connect to the database.
You are still left with the problem of securing the site though so that you can edit the database.
Hope that gives you some idea,
James
Simplicity Rules!
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
