> I think it is very fair. As it's a reality. CFMX is > in direct competition with .NET everyday. Sure it > maybe unfair that MS can leverage cheaper prices, > but it's the bottom line.
While I can certainly understand your reasons for wanting CFMX to be cheaper, I don't think you can expect Macromedia to match Microsoft's pricing. That's what I meant by "not a fair comparison". You can't expect Macromedia to price their products too cheaply for them to make a profit. That's the bottom line. > By two servers I mean CFMX run on Windows, or j2EE, > or Linux. .Net is just Windows. It's cheaper to > implement. I have a hard enough time trying to preach > J2EE to companies that have been with MS for years. > This price difference sure isn't helping any. That's not really correct, to say that .NET is just Windows. It's something that you currently have to install on Windows, just like you have to install CFMX on whatever. You don't pay for .NET directly, but you do pay for using Windows in many ways, and lately it seems that Microsoft is laying the plans to make those costs rise dramatically. Once you've committed to that platform, you're in for a hell of a jolt if you ever have to switch, I suspect. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ voice: (202) 797-5496 fax: (202) 797-5444 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
