In his Electric Duncan blog, Duncan McGreggor argues that Twisted now provides a viable LAMP alternative, and asks some very pertinent "so what?"-type questions:
As such, this is a direct competitor for LAMP. Here are some questions about that: What is the value of a full stack? Why is an alternative to LAMP good or needed? What is a good alternative? [...] We need to be asking ourselves what our applications are, what the network is, what services are, and what our dev teams and engineers need.This led me to ask some questions of my own. Is this true? Is Twisted actually able to provide a full-service alternative web application solution? How adaptable is the architecture? Suppose I want to retain my Django templating instead of transitioning to Nevow: how easy would that be?
The case against LAMP starts with out-of-the-box scalability, as Sean Reifschneider (among other luminaries) has pointed out. I believe that Twisted has been proven at reasonably high levels. Whether it's processing Google-sized firehoses I don't know, but it's certainly supporting a significant part of the airline reservations structure.
As to "what is a good alternative", I suspect a lot of developers would go with "something that's orthogonal to my current code, so I don't have to rewrite anything". Perhaps that's asking a bit much, though. I know from various transitions I have made that some things just "fit my brain", and one of those was the Django templating scheme. Django users are pretty much database-agnostic, though a surprising number of them seem to use PostgreSQL. So perhaps Axiom support of Django templating?
The thing is, you can't just go around claiming to be an effective competitor to LAMP. You have to demonstrate the truth of that claim. I am sure the Twisted guys can do that if they are forced. They just don't realize the marketing necessity yet.