Hey All, Just thought I'd chime in here.
I've seen a lot of folks mentioning BlueDragon and how it may bring down hosting costs for CF. Well I'm not sure about the US, but CF is starting to be offered for NO EXTRA CHARGE up here in Canada. www.uniserve.com for example (and there are others). NT Hosting with SQL Server 2000 and CFMX in a shared environment for about $35 CDN/month and they rock!! I've used the company they recently acquired (Axion Internet) for the past 5 years and the service only got better after the merger. Beleive it or not the SQL Server does not even add any monthly cost...just a $25 CDN setup fee!! So while BD may help bring other ISPs down to earth.....that move is already happening here ;-) Cheers Bryan Stevenson B.Comm. VP & Director of E-Commerce Development Electric Edge Systems Group Inc. t. 250.920.8830 e. [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------- Macromedia Associate Partner www.macromedia.com --------------------------------------------------------- Vancouver Island ColdFusion Users Group Founder & Director www.cfug-vancouverisland.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jim Davis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2003 6:54 PM Subject: RE: DWMX 2004 - Whats new for us? > For me, I wouldn't at the moment just because I'm very happy where I am > (CrystalTech). > > However BlueDragon has the definite potential to bring CF hosting prices > down significantly (one of the complaints I here about CF) so I would > really like to see it offered by a few hosts. > > As Vince pointed out in a branch from this thread BlueDragon also makes > excellent sense for somebody that wants to package their CF application > for use on a server lacking CF (which can be in either J2EE or, soon, > .NET). > > Although this market has traditionally been very small with CF Blue > Dragon may expand it greatly. > > Jim Davis > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Mike Brunt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2003 11:28 AM > > To: CF-Talk > > Subject: RE: DWMX 2004 - Whats new for us? > > > > There is another question in the whole Bluedragon debate. How many of > us > > would move our site(s) to a hosting company using BD instead of MM > > ColdFusion? > > > > Kind Regards - Mike Brunt > > Webapper Services LLC > > Web Site http://www.webapper.com > > Blog http://www.webapper.net > > > > Webapper <Web Application Specialists> > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Jim Davis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2003 7:56 AM > > To: CF-Talk > > Subject: RE: DWMX 2004 - Whats new for us? > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Matt Liotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2003 2:16 AM > > > To: CF-Talk > > > Subject: Re: DWMX 2004 - Whats new for us? > > > > > > > If your clients are small enough where the cost of CF is > prohibitive > > it > > > > may be likely that the cost of managing an Intranet is also > > prohibitive > > > > (although they may be doing it anyway and have never done a cost > > > > analysis). > > > > > > > I'll agree with that, but certainly the use of certain software e.g. > > CF > > > could be what tips the scale. If that is the case, then a cheaper > > > implementation of CFML (BlueDragon) can certainly help in that > regard. > > > > It definitely has an effect, but in most cases (and certainly not in > > CF's case) the cost of software is very small compared to maintenance > > and general infrastructure costs. > > > > Even managing a small, single Intranet server using free software can > be > > (often surprisingly) very costly once you do a full resource > > map/prediction - especially when extended to the life of the server. > > > > All that being said every little bit does help. ;^) If software > costs > > are lower then you total project costs COULD definitely be lower (but > > often aren't due to other factors not commonly taken into account). > > > > > > Many hosting companies are hosting their Intranet at "public" > hosts > > for > > > > this reason. There are some hosts that do nothing but traditional > > > > Intranet applications along with email (Exchange hosting, for > > example, > > > > is pretty common due to the cost and complexity of managing an > > Exchange > > > > server). > > > > > > > That may be, but there are serious issues with outsourcing internal > IT > > > resources externally that many of these companies may not be aware > of. > > > One example of this is that their WAN connection becomes a single > > point > > > of failure. Then of course there are legality issues related to > giving > > > non-employees access to sensitive data that aren't under specific > > > consulting agreements, which is the case when your email is hosted > by > > a > > > 3rd party. > > > > All true - this all depends, of course, on how much the company wants > to > > spend as well. If you want to get away more cheaply you'll be > > sacrificing some things. A full "bullet-proof" system will always > cost > > more. > > > > > > No, consider an Intranet with is planned to contain, let's say, > six > > > > distinct applications (not at all uncommon). My case now is that > > each > > > > of these applications only has to save two hours of development > time > > > > due > > > > to CF for it to be just as cost effective as a "free" solution. > > > > > > > Of course, the case with BlueDragon would only need to save one hour > > > per application. > > > > True. I'm not arguing against Blue Dragon but rather the concept that > > software costs (at this level) are major considerations. Too many > times > > I've heard "we can't afford CF" only to watch a company spends > thousands > > more pursuing an untried "free" solution. > > > > The problem here is almost always one of training and applicability. > A > > company that has great Linux/PostGres/PHP people will, of course, use > > them. > > But a company looking for a solution often gravitates to free software > > due to cost concerns. > > > > Developers are then in the position of learning these tools as they > > develop - which ends up costing far, far more in the long run than > > setting up, for example, a Windows environment that they may have some > > experience with. > > > > For a medium/large company this isn't a problem as the extra time can > be > > split with R&D/Training and down the road you do gain. But for the > very > > small company this often locks them into a money-pit; tying them into > a > > solution they don't know and resulting either in a failed project or > one > > that doesn't meet expectations. > > > > Many of them are roped in by contractors that claim they can "pick up" > > something easily. My advice to small business is always stick with > what > > you know and always pay extra for gurus. > > > > Jim Davis > > > > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm?link=t:4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm?link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com
