Dave; I have the highest level of respect for all you are doing and have done in support of the CF community,
Where I digress from your observation, is not that a developer need not know about operating systems, in fact they should. Not all developer environments utilize developers as network people. Perhaps in yours, but not in all. Network administrators, and system administrators usually have specific duties and responsibilities, such as uptime, content availability, intrusion detection and avoidance, and other security related matters. In many companies, the duties and responsibilities of developers is completely separate from that of the system admins, and this is especially true if the production servers are at a remote location. While it is usually less difficult from a technical point of view for a developer to create work-arounds from broken installer packages, and to make a variety of server software work together in as seamless a fashion as can be, the system admins are the ones who are usually tasked with the install, testing, and bringing online server software. They are usually pretty good at following install instructions, and tech notes, but having the ear of top management, they can get frustrated and are skillful at communicating the difficulties of installs. Larger organizations have separated the duties of developers and administrators, mostly, I believe, due to cost control. My considered opinion is that install packaging and its associated scripting should all be straight forward, and include whatever is needed to complete an install on whatever platform the documentation says it should support. All configuration settings should either be indicated as choices during the install, or a wizard included that will assist the administrator in completing the configuration. There should be included sufficient error trapping and log files that will clearly disclose what and where the problems, if any can be found. Any, and I emphasize any, scripting that should be run, and this includes batch files should be run by the installer script engine, and not require the admin to follow a checklist of hacks to the registry and configuration files, in order to get it to work. This latter will assist the operator to intelligently communicate with the appropriate Technical support. Additionally, technical support should not only be immediately available, but sufficiently qualified to render aid for any and all supported platforms. As one who has spent a number of years in software development, and packaging with InstallShield and Wise installer, I think I know whereof I speak. As for Windows 2003, I father disagree with the opinion that it will not become popular for some time. It can be characterized as Windows XP on steroids, and combining the stability of Win2k. It has a huge marketing budget, and I expect it to be in wide use in a very short time. When combined with Office 2003, and the included RCT functionality, It will no doubt, in my mind, become an awesome platform. Those who delay embracing the technology, will become behind the curve, so to speak. IMHO. ====================================== 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: "Dave Watts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, June 02, 2003 9:26 AM Subject: RE: Before you rush to tell me what to do ... (was: Quick note from the CF Team....) | | As inappropriate as it may seem, web developers are often by necessity | "network people". That's not to say you have to know everything about | network or system administration - I certainly don't, for example. But you | will find that the more about this that you, the developer, know, the fewer | problems you'll have when dealing with the unexpected. After all, web | applications are network applications - they're not used on a single system, | but have interactions between web servers, application servers, database | servers, and clients. | | > I have neither the free days (I run a very small business | > by myself!) nor the $1000 to spend on yet another course | > to learn how to set up Win2K since Win2003 is only around | > the corner unless I can see a pressing advantage for | > doing so. | | It'll probably be a while before Windows Server 2003 becomes popular for | general web hosting, though. In my limited experience with it, I like it a | lot; I like a lot of the changes in IIS 6, for example. But the fact is that | I don't see hosting providers migrating any time soon, if for no other | reason than the activation process - I wouldn't be surprised if that throws | a wrench in the system deployment process. So, since Win2K is here for a | while, I suspect you'd be well-served to learn it. | | Also, you'll find that almost all of your Win2K Server knowledge will be | directly applicable to Win2K3 Server. They're very similar in many respects. | | > Win2K has too many concepts that are different from WinXP. | ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| 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
