LAMP how-to article

A new TechSoup article by Michael Schrecker links to this forum for discussion of the LAMP framework.

LAMP is an acronym describing the use of four Open Source software packages that are used in conjunction: the Linux operating system; the Apache Web server; the MySQL database; and either the PHP, Perl, or Python scripting language.

This post is meant to provide a "landing zone" for anyone coming from there.

It's a good intro for those who don't need or want to get into the nuts and bolts of the back end, but who may have opinions about the front.

I'd also remark that my chief difficulty with implementing open source web offerings is linking individual solutions together. We use LAMP applications for calendar, forum, blog, store, poll, and two custom functions, but all of these have been implemented individually and they all lay over moderate-size legacy static websites.

Yes, some content management systems (with plugins) provide multiple functions, but we have sought best-of-breed solutions for each piece of this puzzle, rather than using merely (or barely) adequate components in an otherwise powerful CMS.

So, while we strongly support LAMP (an new acronym to me, BTW), it's a good idea to approach with some caution. We've gradually, unwittingly built a monster that may well take thousands of dollars to tame (i.e., fully integrate for a well-branded and seamless visitor experience).

(I recognize our problem is not restricted to open-source/LAMP... I was just inspired by the article.)

Scott,

I think you're comment has focused in on one of the key issues that gets overlooked in many IT implementations, the cost of managing increasingly complicated IT systems built over time.

As I mention in the article:
"Of course, like any piece of custom code, a LAMP application requires regular maintenance, and the underlying systems need to be patched and maintained."

This language may not have been insistent enough, as the costs of maintaining multiple separate pieces of "custom" code can quickly overwhelm an organization.

One of the advantages of packaged "all-in-one" solutions, such as the MS Windows Small Business Server, is the simplified maintenance of an integrated suite of tools. The drawback being limitations to customization and addition of third-party features.


Michael

Scott, you're right on the mark regarding ongoing maintenance. Too many businesses and groups focus more on acquisition costs rather than maintenance costs and find themselves behind the eight-ball later.

However, I'm not so sure I'd put MS SBS in the camp of being 'easy' to manage. It certainly offers an integrated platform with wide industry support and that is definately a plus. But, as soon as a company attempts to push the envelope on the capabilities of that suite, a good bit of knowledge can be brought to bear to make sure you don't break any of the integrations.

I wouldn't exclude the Microsoft suite from consideration, but I'd also look at other possiblities such as Nitix, which is a similar offering of integrated tools. I've found this significantly easier to install and manage.