I agree with you, which is the reason why I think PHP is still way more popular than Rails. Cut-and-pasting scripts from Google searches is a terrible way to make code, but it works and it's a lot easier.

I agree with DHH that Rails shouldn't be dumbed down (see his Railsconf 2012 talk https://37signals.com/svn/posts/3171-keynote-by-david-from-r...). Cooking with Rails is like cooking with a real oven, not an easy bake where the end product tastes terrible. Somehow new people need to know that Rails is a real framework that can burn you if you're not careful.

I think the fact that the starting point for php is an html page is a big deal. Whether or not its a good thing to replicate that (and things like that) is debatable but its not just about cutting and pasting from Google.

You can write PHP-style "the file is the html page" code in Ruby with .erb files and mod_ruby. It's no harder to set up than PHP (granted though, most people who abuse PHP like that can't/don't do their own server configuration).

I can't think of anyone though that promotes that method of building websites anymore though, even PHP proponents advocate some flavor of web framework. It just happens to be an easy entry point for using PHP, and once a new developer has built some project momentum for the first time, they're reluctant to start over with something new.

Of course, and that starting point encapsulates much that is good (easy to extend HTML by mixing in some code, quick to get started, zero deployment hassles) and bad (easy to mix content and code, easy to start without thinking about the bigger picture or planning your app, easy to make mistakes like exposing your db password to the world because of a permissions issue say) about PHP.

That's an important point, that Rails presumes database backing, and dynamic sites are inherently more complicated that static pages.

I think the point is that you can ease in to that with PHP - you can be as dynamic or not as you want. Many (many!) people started with PHP just to add a contact form to a site, or make a dynamic copyright date in a footer (or just to do common footers with include()). Rails/Grails/Play/CF/etc assume you want to do a lot more, and force you to do things their way - integrating a tech in to an existing site is really problematic outside of PHP, because most other webdev tech is 'full stack'.

We don't disagree.

> which is the reason why I think PHP is still way more popular than Rails.

language being more popular than a framework! sure :)

bring one framework that is more popular then rails?

google trends proof: http://www.google.nl/trends/explore#q=ruby%20rails,%20symfon... (many people make searches w/o the 'ruby' search term, so rails wins by a larger margin)

some proof here that php is a lot more popular then ruby:

http://www.google.nl/trends/explore#q=ruby%20tutorial,%20rub...

and java more popular then php... and WOW FLASH!

http://www.google.nl/trends/explore#q=php%20tutorial,%20php%...

we a should all use flash, it is the most popular, more so the java!

gosh.. im trying to prove you're comparing apples with bananas and now i find out i should be coding in Adobe Flash (tm).

</joke>

anyway.. i believe php is only marginally more popular then rails, for stuff that involves "web app development". that's what rails made is for. php is used a lot for ftp-ing scripts to cheap webhosting, something is done a lot less with rails.