The point is a company that would throw away six years worth of
development and knowledge acquisition in a heartbeat with no developer
input at all - especially when then there's a way (CFMX) to combine the
two disciplines cleanly, easily and cheaply.
They're purposefully turning an (admittedly small) team of highly adept
CFers into a team of amateur Java/WebSphere developers. Sure, we'll
learn it - but we also expect to let go soon after: we don't think
they'll have any compunctions about firing highly paid amateurs to hire
just-out-school engineers at a lower salary.
I will definitely be learning WebSphere - if I don't I'm definitely
fired. But I'm also being forced to learn it while supporting existing
CF apps full time, while getting very little corporate support from the
existing WebSphere development teams, and with no company development
standards in place. We're basically expected to learn it on our own
time without letting any of our other tasks slip. That may get us there
in the end, but we won't be learning it well and eventually I think
it'll become clear that the quality of our output will have sunk.
It's very unlikely that this predicted drop in quality will be
attributed to the change in toolsets. Even if it is, the most likely
solution will be new developers, not new tools.
The main point is that we're getting a nice, big "screw you".
Jim Davis
-----Original Message-----
From: Adam Reynolds [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 27, 2003 4:58 AM
To: CF-Community
Subject: RE: Crappy Day for ColdFusion (subtitle: "Anybody need a
developer?")
Or just learn websphere. Always useful.
-----Original Message-----
From: Larry C. Lyons [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 26 November 2003 19:32
To: CF-Community
Subject: Re: Crappy Day for ColdFusion (subtitle: "Anybody need a
developer?")
That sucks. It seems that what's occuring is corporate group think. It
may
be time to jump ship.
larry
At 02:08 PM 11/26/2003, you wrote:
>I had a few conversations that just made me sick. First 10 seconds
of
>background:
>
>I'm in a fortune 500 company that was bought by a fortune 50 company
two
>years ago. We made heavy use of CF, the new company has standardized
on
>WebSphere and is pushing us in that direction with cattle prods. For
>this reason we've been unable to upgrade CF past our current 4.5
>version.
>
>The arguments against upgrading have ranged from ridiculous to
sublimely
>stupid. For example:
>
>1) We can't upgrade to MX because we have to focus on Java now.
>
>2) There is no money for CF because we're looking at WebSphere
(remember
>that WebSphere runs 10-20 times the cost of CF, without hardware).
>
>3) That's not the enterprise direction. We have to get our apps
running
>on WebSphere as soon as we can.
>
>So last week I sent out an explanatory mail. It explained that the
>reasons I've heard may be applicable to CF 4.5, but not to MX. It
>described how CFMX is not a server, but rather a J2EE certified
>application. I was eloquent on the fact that upgrading to MX would
>allow us to run our existing apps on WebSphere immediately - at a
>tremendous cost savings over rebuilding from scratch. I explored to
>option to do this and still commit all new development to JSP on the
>same platform with full interoperability between CFML and JSP.
>
>As you might image I was completely ignored. Not one comment on the
>substance of my message.
>
>I went to some of the management to ask if they'd seen it. I got
>several responses:
>
>1) "ColdFusion is a rust-in-place technology here. We won't consider
>it."
>
>2) "If you're not up to speed in WebSphere by midyear you won't have
>value to the company."
>
>3) "I read it. We can't consider ColdFusion now: we have to focus on
>Java."
>
>So, generally speaking, I'm depressed. I remember when technical
>decisions were made by technical people.
>
>I'm going to stick it out as long as I can (and learn WebSphere)...
but
>I think I'll be looking for work soon.
>
>Jim Davis
>
>
>----------
>[
_____
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
