The community has responded to the fact that PHP4 is officially "dead" with a few posts to their blogs. Here's the list so far:

• Havard Eide - RIP PHP4
• Christian Wenz - PHP 4.4.9 Released (And Why You Should Be Worried If You Consider Installing It)
• Stefan Priebsch - PHP 4 is dead. An obituary
• Derick Rethans - RIP PHP4
• Sebastian Bergmann - KTHXBYE PHP 4
• Stefan Esser - PHP 4 - Requiescat in Pace
• Paul Jones - My Birthday Present From php.net
• Ken Guest - PHP 4 - this parrot is deceased!
• Christopher Jones - PHP 4 final-ever-last-terminal release is available
• Chris Shiflett - End of Life for PHP 4
• David Coallier - Small Goodbye to PHP4
• Gennady Feldman - The last day of PHP4
• Jacques Marneweck - So long and thank you for all the fish, PHP4
• Daniel Cousineau - End of an Era (Goodbye to PHP 4)
• Travis Swicegood - Today is the day!
• Lukas Smith - A short goodbye to 4.x
• Bill Gaffney - PHP 4 ends its life with final release 4.4.9
• ComputerWorld - PHP 4 is dead, long live PHP 4
• Evan Sims - PHP is dead, long live PHP! (finally.)
• Matthew Weier O'Phinney - Zend Framework 1.6.0 Preview, or, PHP 4 is Dead
• ZDNet - The Last PHP 4

If you aren't sure what they're talking about - the last day for official PHP 4 support is today, 08.08.08. Only PHP 5 will be supported from here on. It is highly recommended that you upgrade your applications to run on the latest PHP 5 version, 5.2.

In response to another blogger's review of the php|architect "Guide to Programming with Magento", Michael Kimsal has posted some clarifications.

Starting off with "However, I'm not really the type of person to give accolades unless something is absolutely stellar. As such, this post will primarily be about the shortcomings of the book" I wasn't particularly surprised that there was more of a focus on negatives rather than positives.

Michael mentions three topics - the "first to market" point the reviewer makes about different versions of Magento between the book being authored and the release, some of the missing information the reviewer would've liked to see and the complexity of the example module that the reviewer complains is too hard to follow.