PHP4 EoL - How will Users React?

The PHP development team officially announced PHP 4 end of life (EoL):

The PHP development team hereby announces that support for PHP 4 will continue until the end of this year only. After 2007-12-31 there will be no more releases of PHP 4.4. We will continue to make critical security fixes available on a case-by-case basis until 2008-08-08.

PHP 4 has been around for 7 years and PHP 5 for 3 years now. The PHP development team needed to draw a line in the sand and move forward. PHP 5 offers additional capabilities, more security, and OO, to list a few reasons for a PHP developer to upgrade. The fact that PHP 5 support OO programming (i.e. scary stuff for some of us) and PHP 4 “has pretty much all I need” have been reasons for PHP users to stay with PHP 4.

I make a distinction between PHP users (i.e. me) vs. PHP developers (i.e. someone working at Yahoo/Flickr who codes in PHP for a living). A migration from PHP 4 to PHP 5 isn’t as dramatic for PHP developers, even if their current applications are heavily PHP 4 based. PHP developers have the skills to troubleshoot any migration issues and re-write components as necessary. PHP users likely started with code copied from somewhere else that they’ve modified to the best of their abilities and understanding. So, when something doesn’t migrate from PHP 4 to PHP 5, “who ‘ya gonna call”?

Could a groundswell of PHP 4 users happy enough with PHP 4 and uninterested in PHP 5 capabilities be the impetus for a community to (form and) continue supporting PHP 4 beyond 2008-08-08? Realistic or not, I think PHP 4 users would prefer this option over migrating.

Could this situation test an OSS obvious truth: “you have the source, so why worry?”

Having the source to PHP 4 doesn’t help a PHP 4 user like me too much. Arguably, countless PHP 4 users just need to find one person out there that will keep the PHP 4 development stream alive. Will that happen?

PS: I completely understand that the situation for PHP 4 users is much better than if PHP 4 was Traditional software and its EoL was announced. But hey, you could always pay to get support for a product past its EoL.

 

Zend Framework 1.0 due out on Monday

It’s based on PHP 5, limiting its use by the majority of PHP developers who don’t like/understand OO programming, or simply, are happy with PHP 4 thank you very much. But the audience seems to be enterprise developers that want to take advantage of the speed of development & productivity that PHP provides. So, PHP 5 was definitely the right choice.

Infoworld reports:

Zend Framework 1.0 will not be the only PHP development framework around as it will share the scene with frameworks like Cake and Prado. But Zend’s is the first framework with support from a corporate entity and relevant contributions from companies like IBM and Google, Zend said.

Gartner’s Mark Driver is quoted:

“The positive aspect [of the framework] is it this is exactly the kind of thing mainstream IT developers are asking for,” Driver said. But traditional PHP developers already have been satisfied with what has been available, he said.

Will the introduction of this ‘enterprisey’ framework have an impact on the adoption of PHP in the enterprise? Peter Yared, based on his previous post, likely thinks it’ll be an uphill battle. And to be honest, so do I. But hey, let the market decide!

 

Finding Waldo - PHP in the Enterprise

As Stephen & Matt point out, Peter Yared of ActiveGrid fame (but now with a new startup), asks what happened to the much hyped/expected explosion of PHP usage in the enterprise.

Peter puts forward two reasons for this:

1. Java has become easier
2. New infrastructure software has hidden costs

I agree, with both points, especially #2. I am personally aware of two large customer where the IT operations team refused to put a PHP app into production because of administration, management, security and governance issues. The application development team had to rewrite the app in Java.

Two other reasons I’d add to Peter’s list:

3] Developer & IT Operations skills
4] IT Vendor backing

I’m constantly surprised with the number of developers I’ve spoken to who say “I use Java for everything because that’s what I know best and just haven’t had a chance to pick up PHP”. Learning PHP is a weekend chore at best. But, getting as proficient with PHP as you are with Java may not be worth the effort, especially when you’re already overstretched trying to meet deadlines. Also, let’s not forget the skills required to secure, administer, manage and monitor PHP apps. I suspect this is why the IT operations team said no to PHP in the customer examples above.

Major IT vendors have invested in Java and .NET technology and marketplace education. Corporate IT decision makers know about Java and .NET, so when a developer comes in talking about xyz where xyz != (Java | .NET), it’s going to be a difficult discussion.

But all is not lost for PHP in the enterprise.

I believe that PHP’s growth in the enterprise hinges on its acceptance by IT operations teams, which is related to issues #2 and #3 above. Two products that address this gap, (and I’m sure there are others):

Zend Platform helps administer, manage and monitor PHP applications, three very important functions inside an enterprise IT department. A problem that some enterprise customers have with this approach is that you now needed two sets of skills or people. One that would play the IT operations role for your enterprise PHP apps and one for your Java apps (remember we were speaking with Java customers, so insert .NET for Java as appropriate).

IBM WebSphere Extended Deployment Operations Optimization Controller, (wow 62 characters), amongst *many* other capabilities, addresses the above issue with PHP in the enterprise (See Note below). It allows IT operations to manage PHP resources in the same way they manage Java resources.

I mention WebSphere Extended Deployment because it’s a great example of OSS and traditional software being used together to deliver customer value.

We may look back and realize that traditional products like WebSphere Extended Deployments turned out to be the impetus for broader adoption of PHP in the enterprise.

NOTE: Please read more about WebSphere Extended Deployment here. I wouldn’t want you thinking that it’s mainly for PHP stuff. WebSphere Extended Deployment is about quality of service optimizations to your IT investments. Also, I’ve just discussed one feature (PHP support) of one component (Operations Optimization Controller) of WebSphere Extended Deployment. The other two components, Data Grid and Compute Grid, are incredibly powerful and have customers really excited. If you think about Grid Computing, Virtualization, or Extreme Transaction Processing, think WebSphere Extended Deployment.

 

Run PHP on your Barn

Okay, not your barn (watch this to see the barn reference), but how about running PHP natively on your Mainframe?

It should surprise no one that the use of PHP is growing in enterprise environments.  I’m not suggesting that PHP is replacing other “enterprise-class” technologies.  Rather, PHP is being used as part of the enterprise IT bag of tricks.  Sometimes when you’re digging a hole, you need a shovel, other times you need a backhoe.  Let your job dictate the tools you use.

PS: James pointed out the availability of PHP for Z/OS on alphaworks.

 

Top 5 OSS Action Leaders

I know that the original question was “Who are the top 5 OSS thought leaders”, and that’s been covered by several folks already. I’m going to ask a similar, but different question.

Who are the top 5 entities that have brought OSS into everyday (enterprise & commercial) use? This is less a list of Thought Leaders than it is a list of Action Leaders. I don’t usually read the blogs of “people” on this list, but their efforts have changed the IT marketplace. Although you could argue that a thought leader is someone who was preciously an Action Leader….anywho.

<drumRoll>In no specific order:</ drumRoll>

1. PHP guys (Rasmus Lerdorf, Zeev Suraski & Andi Gutmans): How many websites you use today are running PHP? PHP enabled a whole class of “non-techies” to become techie enough to throw up a website with dynamic content or modify existing templates and a legion of startups to get stuff done quickly and on the cheap.

2. IBM & HP: It’s unlikely that Linux would have received enterprise acceptance from CIOs without the backing of major IT vendors such as IBM & HP. The growth of Linux no longer relies on the blessing of major IT vendors, but without the early investments and advertising from IBM & HP, it’s hard to say we’d see Linux adoption where it is today. And both have continued to support OSS by their participation in OSS projects, contributing code, paying key OSS developers to work on their respective OSS projects, and driving revenue from hardware, support and services around OSS. (Note: I’d say IBM has done more around OSS than HP, but that’s because I’m more familiar with IBM’s efforts.) Oh yeah, IBM & HP benefited nicely from their backing of Linux & OSS….nothing wrong with that :-)

3. Stallman/Linus: Hard to have an OSS list of any kind, especially a list that deals with action & results, without Stallman & Linus on it.

4. Marc Fleury: Like him or not, he woke up the middleware market. While many vendors were happy to watch Linux eat into Solaris & Windows accounts (although the latter didn’t happen as much as it is believed), the thought of OSS moving up the stack was really an afterthought. Fleury helped change that view. He made it easier for other OSS vendors to get funding, and forced software vendors (middleware or otherwise) to build strategies that used OSS in order to increase customer choice.

5. Google & Yahoo: How much of Yahoo’s and Google’s infrastructure runs on OSS? We’ll never really know for sure (although many reports indicate it’s a lot), but millions of users get to benefit from their use of OSS to deliver useful tools like GMail, Search, Yahoo Finance, del.icio.us, etc.

[The Pic is from Flickr user powerbooktrance. It's an "Action" figure & I'm looking forward to the Transformers movie. Oh happy childhood memories.]

 

Open Source in India

Red Herring’s Falguni Bhuta predicts “More (Open Source) momentum in developing countries”:

“Open-source software’s transparent nature and low-cost will make it more popular among developing countries such as China and India (see India State: Linux In, MS Out). Marten Mickos, CEO of open-source database company MySQL, says the fast-growing BRIC countries (Brazil, Russia, India, and China) will be breeding grounds in 2007 for interesting open source startups because of the large market and talent. “China and India are so large together, like they have become the physical goods factories of the world, the same will happen with open source,” Mr. Allison says”

While I hope that Falguni’s prediction materializes, a conversation with my cousin in India a few days ago made me wonder for a second.

My cousin works as an IT Admin for a very large American bank with operations in India. His group develops and manages applications, (along with the related OSes and hardware) for use in the bank’s Indian operations. This isn’t an outsourcing operation. I figured they’d be using lots of open source like LAMP, Tomcat or Geronimo to keep costs down. They weren’t. They’re using a lot of Microsoft technology. When I asked why they weren’t using Linux, he asked about how secure Linux and open source in general was. To be honest I was a little surprised that (1) they weren’t using more open source products and (2) he questioned the security of Linux vs. Windows. Note, this is based on a sample size of 1 (well 2 because I’ve heard similar things from another cousin when I asked about Java or PHP vs. .NET, and MySQL vs. Oracle usage), so take it with several grains of salt.

Upon reflection, I shouldn’t have been too surprised:

1] I’ve heard about how important MCSE and other Microsoft certification is in India

2] Microsoft continues to invest heavily in India. Microsoft also benefits from Indian outsourcing companies working for overseas customers with investments in Microsoft technology. If the overseas customer is outsourcing work on Microsoft technology, then Indian outsourcing firms need employees with Microsoft skills.

3] I came across this post from Christopher Blizzard who writes:

.. students who are in schools to which we suggest that they get involved in open source software in India often ask “how will doing work in open source software help me get a job?”

Remember that many of these students are becoming the highest earners in their (extended) family by securing an IT job. This sometimes means that they are, wholly or in part, supporting their parents and siblings through these IT jobs. As a result, they’re very focused on taking steps that will directly result in “a good job with a good company”. Why contribute to an open source project when I can be studying, (which is what classmates are doing)? Sure contributing open source code is good experience, but good exam results often play a larger role in securing a job in India. And yes, one can argue that if you contribute a lot to, say, kernel.org, you may get a job with a commercial Linux distro vendor, but that’s an edge case scenario today.

Maybe the increasing penetration of open source in North America & Europe will drive the need for more open source skills within Indian outsourcing companies. As a result, students will have an incentive to work on open source projects while in school. As this happens, some will surely decide to found an open source-based venture, or decide that such a venture is “a good job with a good company”. It’s also good to see commercial open source vendors like Red Hat hiring more Indian staff. And from a personal standpoint, we have a sizable team of IBM India employees working on Geronimo & WAS CE development & support. Oh, and let’s not forget about the buzz from Indian Government agencies adopting Linux, which should drive more interest for working on open source projects.

The future is definitely bright for open source innovation from India and other emerging countries, but there’s plenty of work to be done yet…it’s going to be a fun ride indeed!

 

What Does More Open Source Funding Mean?

Matthew Aslett, Matt Asay & Alex Fletcher are all writing about the increased funding that open source companies have received in 2006. Good news indeed. (Picture from robinicus919)

I got to thinking about what this all means. What’s the impact of giving investors (who expect big returns) a larger say in OSS vendor operations? Is this good for the open source market, or just a step along the path towards a joint OSS & traditional software business model? So, I called up a friend in venture capital and something he said made me think. He said:

“Everyone’s hoping to either become the next Red Hat or get sold to IBM or Oracle.”

I think his view of “everyone” is more indicative of OSS (open source software) investors, rather than OSS company founders. Although, founders probably do want to become the next Red Hat.

Now, if we believe that the world only needs 5 computers, then does the world only need 10 software companies? Okay, maybe 10 is a ridiculous number. But the software market is definitely consolidating.

How long can the Red Hats of the world remain independent? Up until now, the traditional software vendors have all benefited from an independent Red Hat. Let Red Hat make its money on Linux with “our” help in driving the acceptance of Linux. Along the way we’ll sell a lot more hardware and related software and services. Everyone wins. But as Red Hat and others begin to expand up and across the software stack, there’s more talk about traditional software vendors acquiring pure play OSS vendors. For instance, there have been rumours of Red Hat & Zend being acquired by Oracle, and Oracle did try to buy JBoss.

Next, several OSS vendors out there today are really developing features, not stand-alone products. For the most part, these vendors will either be acquired by pure play OSS software vendors (a la Red Hat), acquired by a traditional software vendor or go under.

I’m beginning to think:

1. Consolidation in the traditional software market is in full swing and will only continue.
2. The pure play OSS vendor market will face a similar degree of consolidation.
3. As #2 happens, investors in OSS vendors will (strongly) direct OSS vendors to seek a buyout from a traditional software vendor. Just think about how many traditional software companies have been able to make it on their own vs. how many have been acquired.
4. A large portion of pure play OSS vendors will find new homes within a traditional software vendor.
5. As #4 happens, traditional software vendors will have to adjust their business models to include the OSS business model as another choice, or in some cases, the only choice, for delivering high quality software at the lowest total cost of ownership.

When this happens, will we say that open source won or that the traditional software model won? Ummm. Yes? As I’ve mentioned before, this is why I’m not a big fan of the “us vs. them” approach. The open source business model is great, and I support it. But it won’t replace the traditional software business model anytime soon or wholesale. An evolution as the two models blur together is much more likely. So, let’s focus on “us and them”.

 

Re: Open Source is Game Changing

Zack, the three examples you give appear to me as signs that OSS is under attack by vendors who don’t grok the value of an open community & the customer value delivered. Yep, even the MSFT deal with Zend. You’re correct that OSS is changing the game, but if the OSS community sticks to its vision of a 100% OSS world, in which commercial software is something your father used, then you’re going to see aggressive moves by vendors like Oracle & Microsoft bent on protecting their turf. The truth is that the future of the software market lies in the mutual existence of the OSS & commercial software business models. Neither is going away anytime soon, or ever. So, if we accepted this outcome, and toned down the rhetoric, there would be a better chance of educating vendors like Microsoft & Oracle to the benefits of adding open source products into their product lines without poisoning the communities that develop said products.

At the end of the day, customers want high quality software, support, performance, reliability, scalability and availability for the best price. Sometimes OSS will be the answer for the project. Other times it will be a commercial product. It comes down to customer choice.

One can argue that customers are better off with OSS because they can see the code and aren’t locked-in. However, I think that’s a simplistic view, and for the average customer, one that isn’t supported in practice and especially since mature OSS vendors inevitably start looking very much like mature commercial vendors.

Take a look at what IBM WebSphere did with our support for Apache Geronimo, and building an IBM product based on Geronimo. Not only has the WebSphere Application Server revenue growth remained healthy compared to our commercial & open source competition, we’ve been able to truly get involved and help the Geronimo community innovate. Customers have been big winners here (well, so have we!).

There’s a lesson for Microsoft & Oracle in the success of IBM WebSphere & WAS Community Edition…if they’d only peer out from under the bed.

 

MSFT to Zend: We come in peace

….<wink>Maybe….</wink>

Microsoft & Zend announced a multi-year agreement aimed at improving the performance of PHP on Microsoft web server, Internet Information Server (IIS). Historically, PHP has performed substantially better on the Apache web server than on IIS. Early results from the joint work indicate 100-150% performance improves in certain cases. This could indicate great work, or just how terrible performance was before.

PHP has long been a competitor to ASP, so while some say this is a great example of how to work with OSS companies, I suggest that this is likely step 1 along a path that will see Microsoft implement a PHP runtime into the .NET CLR (as they have done with Python) and either compete with or acquire Zend (the latter wouldn’t be easy at all). I’ve said it before during some IBM work: “Every PHP developer out there today is a VB developer that Microsoft lost” (sure developers use multiple languages; but the fact that they’re using PHP for a given application instead of VB has to be worrisome).

Microsoft could live with a VB developer leaving VB for PHP, as long as it’s PHP on .NET. Hence, I’m not sure this deal is great for the PHP community or PHP developers in general.  It is however good for Zend because it means another large IT that could become a suitor in the future (and hence a bidding war - sorry, I have real estate on my mind).