What a ridiculous comment! That really shows the intelligence level of a reader of this list. MM certainly does have control of the installation environment, as this is done with scripting in the installer package.
He has related often enough, that the explicit MM installation instructions were followed. The Provider reviewed the published system requirements. The server meets or exceeds these published requirements. His is not the only provider having issues with the installation of MX. There has been a myriad of white papers and revisions to release notes written and released by MM, plus hundreds upon hundreds of list and forum postings and most relate to default installs on a dedicated server. They seem to have that down pretty pat. The multi-homed, or shared server environment is apparently a different animal. It shouldn't be. It wasn't with CF 5.0 and earlier. I also realize that there are some MM employees that are genuinely concerned about these issues, and are trying to get the people that are having problems in contact with the relevant people that should be able to fix them. Unfortunately, the play is analogous to chickens running around with their heads cut off. Perhaps it is a lack of test platforms on which to test the installer. Perhaps it is a number of reasons. The original CD-ROM has an installer packaged with a very incomplete InstallShield packager. Glaring omissions in the IS scripting is the chaining of services, the start-up/shut-down/restart services, scripting to control the JRUN connectors, etc. The UD3 is packaged with InstallAnywhere, which is less than an industry standard installer package, but the install scripting is also leaving a lot to be desired as far as scripted configuration options go. Even if one purchased CFMX today, the initial install package will not include UD3!I am satisfied that MM is working on it, because by not resolving the problem, sales will be negatively impacted. Customer loyalty is clearly being eroded. No server administrator, whether he does or does not have a developer background wants to deal with software that is as tedious and difficult to configure as that sold by Macromedia. The Install packaging scripting should provide for all the supported options, and scripting should be included to do all the install and configuration before the installer package quits. That is just good software distribution packaging practices. Basically, my own position is that if a reader does not have anything positive to contribute to the solution, then please just use your delete key and skip on to the next message. ====================================== Stop spam on your domain, use our gateway! For CF hosting solutions http://www.clickdoug.com ISP rated: http://www.forta.com/cf/isp/isp.cfm?isp_id=772 ====================================== If you are not satisfied with my service, my job isn't done! ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ken Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, June 06, 2003 3:43 PM Subject: RE: Very unsatisfied with Macromedia's support attention ... | | Does that, perchance, equate to being a cheap hosting company? And, if so, | are you now getting exactly what you've paid for? | | MM has no control whatsoever over the installation conditions or technical | competence of those who claim to be hosting providers. Perhaps your public | anger is better directed at the hosting company rather than the one who | sells a product that has proven itself (at least in other hands) to be quite | capable. | | Ken ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| 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 Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
