26 replies to this topic

[DunWeb]

After reading this post on Twitter,

Quote

haraldpdl Harald Ponce de Leon
The minimum requirement for OSCOM v3.0 is PHP v5.3. We are one of the first general solutions to move to PHP v5.3. #oscommerce

I searched around and found the following hosting providers will not be able to run the upcoming release of v3.x

Hostgator - PHP 5.2
Godaddy - PHP 5.2
Blue Host  - PHP 5.0
Siteground - PHP 5.2
Ultra Website Hosting - PHP 5.2
Inmotion Hosting - PHP 5.2
Webhosting Hub - PHP 5.0
Ipage - PHP 5.2
Fat Cow - PHP 4.x & 5.0
Just Host - PHP 5.0
Blue Host - PHP 5.0
Host Monster - PHP 5.0
Green Geeks - PHP 5.0
My Hosting - PHP 5.2.9
Hostway - PHP 5.2.6
UK2 - PHP 5.2.5
SKY.UK.Net - PHP 4.x & 5.0 w/Soap
Nativespace PHP 5.0



So, with just a 30 minute search I found that those 18 hosting providers will not have the capabilities to run the much anticipated release of version 3.x.  How disappointing !  v3.x should be backward compatible to at least PHP 5.2 as this minimum requirement will exclude most everyone from using v3.x until such a time that their hosting provider updates to PHP 5.3.


I am glad v2.3.1 is stable and works on most every server or osCommerce would be at a dead stop !




Chris

[Mark Evans]

DunWeb, on 18 March 2011 - 05:39 AM, said:

So, with just a 30 minute search I found that those 18 hosting providers will not have the capabilities to run the much anticipated release of version 3.x.  How disappointing !  v3.x should be backward compatible to at least PHP 5.2 as this minimum requirement will exclude most everyone from using v3.x until such a time that their hosting provider updates to PHP 5.3.

When deciding on if we should go with PHP 5.3 as a minimum requirement it was known that few shared hosting providers supported it, however IMO the benefits we gain far out wieigh the current lack of support. The framework would be much less flexible and harder to maintain had we not done with PHP 5.3. Every major distro now has PHP 5.3 builds available, PHP 5.2 is now End of life so building a new framework upon it would of been a mistake IMO.

Time to get pressuring hosting providers to provide PHP 5.3 on their platform

DunWeb, on 18 March 2011 - 05:39 AM, said:

I am glad v2.3.1 is stable and works on most every server or osCommerce would be at a dead stop !

2.3.x will receive some bug fix updates in the coming months after 3.x is released to ensure we don't abandon the existing user base

[pdcelec]

DunWeb, on 18 March 2011 - 05:39 AM, said:

After reading this post on Twitter,




I searched around and found the following hosting providers will not be able to run the upcoming release of v3.x

Hostgator - PHP 5.2
Godaddy - PHP 5.2
Blue Host  - PHP 5.0
Siteground - PHP 5.2
Ultra Website Hosting - PHP 5.2
Inmotion Hosting - PHP 5.2
Webhosting Hub - PHP 5.0
Ipage - PHP 5.2
Fat Cow - PHP 4.x & 5.0
Just Host - PHP 5.0
Blue Host - PHP 5.0
Host Monster - PHP 5.0
Green Geeks - PHP 5.0
My Hosting - PHP 5.2.9
Hostway - PHP 5.2.6
UK2 - PHP 5.2.5
SKY.UK.Net - PHP 4.x & 5.0 w/Soap
Nativespace PHP 5.0



So, with just a 30 minute search I found that those 18 hosting providers will not have the capabilities to run the much anticipated release of version 3.x.  How disappointing !  v3.x should be backward compatible to at least PHP 5.2 as this minimum requirement will exclude most everyone from using v3.x until such a time that their hosting provider updates to PHP 5.3.


I am glad v2.3.1 is stable and works on most every server or osCommerce would be at a dead stop !




Chris

Add eukhost.com to the list. They support 5.2 and will not be updating soon

[multimixer]

I agree with the team position.

Host providers will update earlier or later, nobody can stop the progress.

And for osCommerce it's much better to be a step ahead and to get rid of the image of the "good old solid grandfather"

[DunWeb]

multimixer, on 18 March 2011 - 09:01 AM, said:

I agree with the team position.Host providers will update earlier or later, nobody can stop the progress.And for osCommerce it's much better to be a step ahead and to get rid of the image of the "good old solid grandfather"

Yes, sooner or later they will update, but writing a software program that 50% (just guessing on this) can't use seems redundant.  What if they don't update for 2 years ?  That means v3.x may be out of date before it is even really used.

Stepping ahead is fine, but abandoning what is currently in use makes no sense.  It is like building a car that runs on a fuel that isn't available to most of the world.  A bad decision IMO.




Chris

[Mark Evans]

DunWeb, on 18 March 2011 - 11:18 AM, said:

Yes, sooner or later they will update, but writing a software program that 50% (just guessing on this) can't use seems redundant.  What if they don't update for 2 years ?  That means v3.x may be out of date before it is even really used.

The point of using 5.3 was to ensure it wasn't out of date, there will always be options for hosting companies that make 5.3 available, all major frameworks are moving towards it and soon all apps will move to it as well.

[multimixer]

DunWeb, on 18 March 2011 - 11:18 AM, said:

[...]It is like building a car that runs on a fuel that isn't available to most of the world [...]

Chris, we still have the old car. The longer it will take for the hosts to upgrade the longer we will keep using it, and that's not bad for the invested work into the old version. And it is also not bad to have some time to get used to the new version,  develop addons etc.

[Biancoblu]

I think all software should move on and as such v3.0 can only be a positive, however, at present there are 2 big problems:
first the fact that many hosts don't support PHP5.3 yet and we don't know when they will update, and second is the fact that most oscommerce users are just that: users NOT coders, and I don't see how average users will be able to code their own modifications unless they hire a pro to do it. (Already on v2.3.1 the install of certain add ons requires some code edits that many people people can't manage on their own).
V3.0 right now sounds as though it can only be handled by a few people: developers/coders and hosts that support PHP5.3, but it doesn't sound as though it can be handled by the vast majority of people using 2.3.1 or older versions.

[Mark Evans]

DunWeb, on 18 March 2011 - 11:18 AM, said:

Stepping ahead is fine, but abandoning what is currently in use makes no sense.  It is like building a car that runs on a fuel that isn't available to most of the world.  A bad decision IMO.

We aren't abandoning anything, but IMO there is no point in building a foundation in something which is already end-of-life and non supported. If that slows adoption then fair enough, eventually the rest will catchup.

[burt]

Perhaps there is an opportunity for someone to rent a couple of well-specced servers and open up a "oscommerce only" hosting co.  Seems ideal.  Become a corporate sponsor and everyone is a winner.

[multimixer]

Gary, you are a businessman

[burt]

LOL - I used to work in a hosting co.  Never again!  

If someone was to do it, I'd suggest not going down the cheap and cheerful route of $5 a month, but charge $25 a month or maybe more.  Business level hosting, based on being the only hoster who can do osc v3 and is a corporate sponsor.  If HPDL had his head screwed on, well, I guess he could have all sorts of services offered alongside the "free" oscommerce;  hosting, domain name, templates, coding service, paid for helpdesk and loads more.  An osCommerce APP store even

[DunWeb]

Quote

If HPDL had his head screwed on, well, I guess he could have all sorts of services offered alongside the "free" oscommerce; hosting, domain name, templates, coding service, paid for helpdesk and loads more. An osCommerce APP store even

One would have to assume HPDL is millionaire and does not really need additional income which would be generated from 'additional services'.


However, I do have a Dedicated box and may just update it to PHP 5.3 to offer such services !  However, since it was your idea G, if you set it up, I will refer v3.x users to you.   I guess all of the concern will be a waste of time if this release of v3.x is like the last.




Chris

[GemRock]

nice to know theres charitable people out there willing to set up charity(ies) to offer osc v3 services, be prepared to have enough fund to last the initial two years, though.
no hurry up for the count down deadline IMO - i would not complain about any further delay - you are well in advance of the real world. i am still trying hard to break v2.3.x so that it takes ANY addons, e.g., get rid of all the bm_boxes, if needs be, sorry.
ken

Edited by GemRock, 19 March 2011 - 06:48 AM.

[cs76134]

DunWeb, on 18 March 2011 - 05:39 AM, said:

After reading this post on Twitter,




I searched around and found the following hosting providers will not be able to run the upcoming release of v3.x

Hostgator - PHP 5.2
Godaddy - PHP 5.2
Blue Host  - PHP 5.0
Siteground - PHP 5.2
Ultra Website Hosting - PHP 5.2
Inmotion Hosting - PHP 5.2
Webhosting Hub - PHP 5.0
Ipage - PHP 5.2
Fat Cow - PHP 4.x & 5.0
Just Host - PHP 5.0
Blue Host - PHP 5.0
Host Monster - PHP 5.0
Green Geeks - PHP 5.0
My Hosting - PHP 5.2.9
Hostway - PHP 5.2.6
UK2 - PHP 5.2.5
SKY.UK.Net - PHP 4.x & 5.0 w/Soap
Nativespace PHP 5.0



So, with just a 30 minute search I found that those 18 hosting providers will not have the capabilities to run the much anticipated release of version 3.x.  How disappointing !  v3.x should be backward compatible to at least PHP 5.2 as this minimum requirement will exclude most everyone from using v3.x until such a time that their hosting provider updates to PHP 5.3.


I am glad v2.3.1 is stable and works on most every server or osCommerce would be at a dead stop !




Chris

Looks like we need to add Hypermart to this list ~ PHP Version: 5.2.12

Cindy

[DunWeb]

Frank,

Pm Mark Evans with the hosting provider and he will add it to the current list of approved hosting providers for v3.x



Chris

[swoap]

I think it's a bad idea for a shop owner to lock her innovation because her hoster says i dont want to upgrade for you... If he dont want, it's his problem, not yours. Sometimes it's time to take some risk and explore other way for make money, see invest a little, like as change your favorite hoster for a other for exemple. It's the life...

A company have some needs, if you like your company, you'll find  it and it isn't your hoster who manage your shop there is only you.

I'm agree with multimixer

Quote

Host providers will update earlier or later, nobody can stop the progress.

If people needs to evoluate to oscom3, they need to be logical with them and evoluate to a hoster with php 5.3.

Ovh have php5.3

SetEnv PHP_VER 5_TEST

in .htaccess file.

Thx to HDLP and the rest of OSCOM team for this hard work. We hope you the succes

[Mark Evans]

DunWeb, on 31 March 2011 - 06:47 PM, said:

Pm Mark Evans with the hosting provider and he will add it to the current list of approved hosting providers for v3.x

This list isn't for "Approved" hosting providers, its just for hosting providers that offer PHP 5.3. I haven't tested osCommerce on any of them and have only verified that they offer PHP 5.3 as an option in their shared hosting package

[pederb]

burt, on 18 March 2011 - 01:17 PM, said:

Perhaps there is an opportunity for someone to rent a couple of well-specced servers and open up a "oscommerce only" hosting co.  Seems ideal.  Become a corporate sponsor and everyone is a winner.

I like that idea.

Cheers

[raymor]

Biancoblu, on 18 March 2011 - 01:09 PM, said:

first the fact that many hosts don't support PHP5.3 yet and we don't know when they will update, and second is the fact that most oscommerce users are just that: users NOT coders, and I don't see how average users will be able to code their own modifications unless they hire a pro to do it. (Already on v2.3.1 the install of certain add ons requires some code edits that many people people can't manage on their own).

"Already on v2.3.1 the install of certain add ons requires some code edits that many people people can't manage on their own" and that's one problem fixed by the new 3.x design.  Installing addons will now be extremely simple.  In 2.x, installing multiple addons can easily become a nightmare.  In 3.0, just upload the files and activate.  Because the core OSC files are not changed by addons and addons only interact in a well defined way, compatibilty issues are GREATLY reduced.  

Writing new addons will certainly be very different, and marginally more difficult.
I think, though, that if PDL or someone makes (or made) a tutorial with a couple of
skeleton addons coders will get the hang of it pretty quickly.  It'll largely just
be a matter of getting them to "unlearn" the idea of hacking through the core OSC
code and instead put their own code in their own module, where it doesn't interfere
with any core OSC code or any other addons.