There really isn't anything specific in the article that makes it significantly dated. His reasons would be just as valid if he'd written this yesterday about the latest and greatest PHP and Rails versions.<p>1 - He felt he could get what he needed to get done in PHP just as well as in Rails<p>2 - Integration costs of One Grand Switch from existing large PHP codebase to entirely new Rails codebase were high<p>3 - Felt no need for most of the infrastructure Rails provides, was too complex for him to understand easily<p>4 - Better performance<p>5 - Easier integration (due to 1 &#38; 3, presumably)<p>6 - Didn't want/need an ORM layer and related handholding and/or headaches<p>7 - Rails/Ruby were better for him to lift ideas from than to actually use directly<p>I can't think of anything so dramatic that's happened to PHP and Rails since Sept 2007 to really make his reasoning of 'historical interest only'. Certainly nothing like the change from Java 1.0 (a small, sluggish language released 14(!!) years ago) and Java today (huge ecosystem of products, languages, frameworks running on one of the faster VMs/JITs around).