I am not going to get sucked into a flame war here, but this one line just begged a response ...
> Blackstone is not equivalent to .NET in power and performance. Did you, by any chance, mean to compare J2EE to .NET, or were you really displaying such an amazing lack of understanding as to what ColdFusion MX is as to compare CF to .NET? I am hoping this was just a typo. If you want to get into a .NET versus J2EE debate, go for it. There is no winner or loser in that one, by the way. And if CF does not scale, well, neither does IBM WebSphere, BEA WebLogic, JRun, and the like. I assume that you did not mean to imply that. Does that mean that ever CF application will scale well? Nope, not at all, but well written ones will. In the past few weeks I have been personally involved in several massive CF deployments that were failing under load, and when the consulting team went in to find the causes each and every one of the problems ended up being bad code or badly configured J2EE servers. And no, I am not putting down .NET, .NET has lots going for it, as does J2EE, as does CF. Pick one, pick multiple, pick them all, pick something else altogether - whatever works best for you. But please avoid silly flame rampage postings. They serve no one. --- Ben -----Original Message----- From: Will Tomlinson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, December 12, 2004 7:16 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: CF vs ASP.NET! GET YOUR FRESH POPCORRRRN!! I'm going to bring this one in from the Blackstone Beta thread yesterday because I think we all need to talk about this. I'm not going to rehash most of what's been said in that thread. ASP.NET is taking market away from CF! WHY? Will Blackstone fix the shift that's taking place? I say no! CF is still outrageous to purchase. The licensing for the .NET SDK is free as is the licensing to deploy. I'm not trying to attack CF here, I'm really not. I'm just trying to wake people up, because I think we've been lulled to sleep by Blackstone. Blackstone is not equivalent to .NET in power and performance. Yeah, maybe it's easy for us to code our simple CFML, and yeah that <cfdocument> is pretty neat, but there are a few factors making CF'ers like me change hats, and put on the .NET one! Will MM ever come up with a true development language like .NET? Are they going to keep putting more icing on the same cake, while Microsoft bakes fresh ones? I'll plug Tim Uzzanti's comments below. I think the man would know something about the subject, plus he'll tend to be more honest since he's not on our side of the business. One more thing. Please don't attack me! I'm just the messenger! Tim Uzzanti: "If you believe CF can handle the same traffic loads that .NET can handle, then you are completely confused on the technologies and their infrastructure. I have no idea if 75% of fortune 100% companies use CF, I would love to see some documentation for that, but the Fortune 100 companies ARE NOT the Top 100 sites on the Internet either! Asking someone who maintains and manages 10,000 hosted applications on Cold Fusion and someone who manages thousands of .NET applications would probably give you a pretty good opinion of what they see? Is it in my BEST interest to tell a customer not to use CF, or is it in my best interest to suggest what might be the best technologies from my experiences on their requirements? Someone mentioned ediet.com which has a traffic ranking of around 280,000 and in comparison CrystalTech is around 23,000. Microsoft.com which is in the top 10 is using ASP.NET and Dell.COM which is in the top 100 is also using ASP.NET Regarding the back end of Cold Fusion: CFMX is much better than CF5 but still has many limitations and quirks that we have see and deal with every day. I am not saying that CF doesn't have the ability to grow with larger sites because it has features like the ability to cluster machines and the classes are compiled etc. What I am saying is, if you would like to build an application that can last longer on certain hardware or run more optimally, CF is not the way to go! Cold Fusion MX out of the box has a setting to support no more than 10 simultaneous requests at one time. Macromedia suggestions that you never exceed 40 and this isn't optimal for a large scale sites. There are other settings and issues from a server administration standpoint that hinder CFMX from out performing .NET There are other factors that one needs to think about when writing an application. Think about the ability to use Threads in .NET. Depending on your application, sitting and processing 10 requests back to back may take 5 minutes but if you had the ability to run the 10 tasks concurrently you may be able to respond back to the customer in 30 seconds. You have to realize, .NET isn't just a web based language, it is a Development language for desktop and server applications as well. CrystalTech uses SmarterMail which is built on the .NET and it outperforms all other mail servers that are built on C and C++. One last comment that I would also provide to a potential customer who may want to move from a shared environment to a dedicated environment is that you will need to purchase a license for CFMX. If this is a large site and will expand to multiple servers then they will need to purchase a $4,500 license possibly x 2... Again, this isn't something that affects CT, but would affect the customer..." ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Gold Sponsor - CFHosting.net http://www.cfhosting.net Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:187270 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
