I use PHP to develop for the web every day. Thus far, the friction of PHP being a bad language hasn't outweighed the utility of it being easy, though as time goes on that utility is worth less and less.
I'm sure you're perfectly capable of writing marvelous code in PHP or any other language.
I think you've perhaps gotten into the trap of assuming that if a programmer doesn't use the latest cool language (Ruby, Coffeescript, etc.) they are dumb.
And that's okay. But I'd strongly assert that "PHP is quick, easy and gets the job done" does not support the assertion "PHP is a well-designed language." From what I've seen, Laravel is as high-quality an MVC framework as anything you could find in another language. But if it's a truism that terrific coders can produce terrific code in any programming language -- and I think it is -- then "there is terrific code in PHP" is not a defense of PHP's language design.
No, it's not. You should maybe replace Laravel with Symfony 2.
See, I can make ridiculous statements about things I don't know anything about too!
(note: I no next to nothing about NodeJS - I enjoy javascript as a language but haven't had a chance to actually use NodeJS beyond a couple tutorials)
I also touched ruby and python but I don't consider them part of my knowledge since I didn't really use them professionally and thats why I don't want to include them in my statement above.
But he uses it only because it's easy? Sounds like the very kind of developer he's trying to mock.
That's not what I got from the comment (though, as an aside, I do think that there is a correlation between programming smarts and language/framework choice, adjusted for circumstances.)
It sounded to me that people pick PHP for assorted reasons, one being the surrounding support environment (cheap hosting, ease of slapping together a works-ok-right-now site, ease of finding replacement devs when needed). Another reason for choosing PHP, though, is because you don't have to have serious coding chops to make practical use of it.
OTOH, mobile dev requires at least some serious coding chops, and does not have the equivalent support environment for PHP. And if you have some decent coding chops you are likely to want to use a better-designed language than PHP.
Please, explain this in further detail. List out which languages are "smarter" and why. Please provide empirical evidence to back up this thesis and explain the methodology followed to gather and interpret the data.
Otherwise, stop saying ridiculous things that you can't back up.
In addition, please explain what about PHP makes it unsuitable for the mobile platform when clearly Java does just fine there. I'll need more then a link to the "fractal of bad design" blog post. I'm honestly curious why people continue to talk about PHP's bad design without really explaining what makes their chosen replacement better.
Please, get over yourself. I expressed an opinion. I wrote "I do think that ..." It's obviously anecdotal, based on personal and professional experience. YMMV and all that. Stop with the pretentious "back up this thesis" crap.
I'm honestly curious why people continue to talk about PHP's bad design without really explaining what makes their chosen replacement better.
I guess it's like porn. You know it when you see it.
I'd choose Ruby over PHP for Web dev any chance I could. I doubt I have the resources to prove to you why this makes sense. Such is life.
I did a few years of PHP work, then learned Ruby, and never looked back. What can I say. As far as a can tell the range of available libraries for each language is about equivalent. I can use JRuby and use any Java lib as well. Deploying and hosting Ruby or JRuby is quite easy for me. While Ruby is not flawless I am personally convinced is less sucky than PHP. Opinions may differ; it matters not to me.
If your experience is the the contrary, go forth and be happy in your choices.
I have a feeling I should link to some pg essay at this point, but I'm too tired to go find one. Besides, those who care will likely have already read it, and those who don't, won't.