Rapid development isn't as important as you think, not to a customer. They
want something done using a technology they have heard of.

I have seen it time and time again. When you make a bid to a customer
quoting a CF site that it done faster and cheaper, vs. a .NET site that
takes longer and costs more, the customer will get the .NET site, or Java.

Why, because they have heard of them, major companies at the front of
development technologies are supporting them.

Allaire, Macromedia, Adobe, not names that make a company think development
technology. When people hear Macromedia they thing Flash, when people hear
adobe they think Acrobat.

We lost bids for that very reason, that was the driving force that caused my
old company to go away from CF.

When we started selling pre-packaged apps, the same thing came up. We can
sell it with .NET for $500, all they need is a windows server. Or we could
sell it for $1,700 with CF Server. Often companies wouldn't want to put CF
Server onto their .NET server.

CF is a great language, but Rapid Development is nowhere near the top of my
list of important things when picking a language.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tony [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2006 3:03 PM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re: Why is coldfusion better.
> 
> On 1/24/06, G <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Uh, yeah, that's because CF's primary advantage is ease of use and rapid
> > development.
> 
> ok, great... not a downfall.
> 
> > What everyone seems to be conveniently ignoring, though, is that a well
> > written compiled program will outperform a well written CF program.
> 
> how can you say this? for real dog.  how?  with enough server ass and
> well written code, it will perform no less better that any application.
> 
> > So your project was done on Monday, someone elses was done on Tuesday,
> and
> > theirs runs faster. Which one becomes more valuable to the company?
> Depends.
> 
> the one that they spent less time and money on.  employee costs included.
> a
> cf developer costs far less than most GOOD .NET developers that we have
> come
> across.
> 
> > Again, rapid development is a great advantage, but it's not the whole
> > picture.
> 
> you are right.  again i still see no benefit.  but like most have
> said, its about the
> right tool for the right job.  for a web based application, cfmx 7.0
> could and can stand
> head and shoulders above ANYTHING else.
> 
> tw
> 
> 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:194083
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Reply via email to