I agree, and this comes back to my complaints/arguments about install/configuration issues. According to the posts on the Macromedia site, it appears that very little attention is spent on testing the install and configuration scripts.
While Macromedia may well have the brainiest of them all on the payroll. the glaring omission is that they focus on default installations for a single use, preferably on a developer machine where the developer actually does the installation. They seem not to realize that production server applications are not usually installed by developers but by System Admins, except in very small shops. This may well be the reason their own production web servers use MM products only in bits and pieces, and with a great deal of competing software. No other software vendor that I am aware of, requires you to run the install application, and then have to go into the system and modify individual files, move DLL files around, change registry entries manually in order to complete the install/.configuration. They do not appear to realize that this one characteristic is driving customers away. At the very least, the CF Administrator applet should be able to provide online help for the admin for most. if not all configuration issues and provide a direct pathway to making whatever changes are needed to get the product up and running with a minimum of fuss. It is very expensive for company to need to have its System Administrator spend an extraordinary amount of labor just to configure one piece of software on a production server. The only response, I have ever received from anyone at MM addressing this problem was a suggestion that a separate piece of hardware be used for each web site hosted (Note, that also would require additional licenses from MM, right?) which was a ludicrous suggestion. The same for signing up for and paying the big bucks for support. Until they get on top of this, I fear their products are going to become harder and harder to sell. Note: The foregoing is a composite of comments from my group members. ===================================== Douglas White group Manager mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.samcfug.org ===================================== ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeremy Allen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Linux" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 2002 10:13 AM Subject: RE: eweek on cf / linux | I think the complaints are valid, to an extent. Yes, there are some rather | glaring and ugly issues with CFMX. I think MM has been a little sluggish and | resistant to acknowledge some of the problems unless the people complaining | follow very specific channels (which IMO greatly limits the field of vision | on knowing about bugs and getting them resolved). I think it is an asinine | policy to force a bug to be acknowledged almost primarily through a support | system that requires a credit card. They are in the business of software, if | they are informed about a bug, it should be researched.. at least to some | extent. | | ______________________________________________________________________ Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-linux%40houseoffusion.com/ To Unsubscribe visit http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/cf_linux or send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body.
