inclined to do FB4, but I am trying very hard to be open-minded to other
options. I will definitely check out the onTap article.
-Bret
Barney Boisvert wrote:
> > - Fusebox
> FB3 was great, FB4 is fantastic. Couple either of these (FB4's preferable)
> with a CFC backend and I don't know that you can get a much better
> framework.
>
> > - MachII
> Also very good, although has a steeper learning curve and reduced ability to
> easily throw an "shoot from the hip" app together for testing. However, the
> additional abstraction that's built-in (and has to be synthesized with FB4)
> would be a boon to large projects.
>
> > - Blackbox (http://www.cfblackbox.com)
> > - BatFink (http://www.mossyblog.com/downloads.cfm)
> > - onTap (http://www.turnkey.to/ontap/)
> > - SmartObjects
> Never used any of these, though Issac (of onTap fame) wrote a series of
> articles comparing onTap, FuseBox and Mach-II. Check out his site. If I
> recall correctly, FB4 was better than FB3, and it was wishy-washy beyond
> that. onTap was better for certain things, FB better for others. I believe
> onTap is significantly richer than either Fusebox (built in caching, for
> example), so that needs to be taken into account as well.
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
