On 6/9/06, Earl, George <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The second comment above about using the 'latest FB4.1 or 5' is one that > concerns me. As someone who participates in building large enterprise > web applications, I'd love to adopt a framework and get all of the > resulting benefits that have been discussed here.
FB5 is backwards compatible with FB4.1 excepting a few very edge cases. It's also fixed some of the bugs that FB4.1 had. So that upgrade path is pretty painless. However, just beacuse a framework evolves doesn't mean you have to upgrade. I have more applications running FB3 than I have running FB4.x and FB5 combined, and I helped develop FB4.1. For many of those apps, we ran CF 4.5 until well after CF6.1 came out. We have subsequently upgraded to CF6.1, but have no plans to upgrade to CF7 nor CF8 (at least as of right now). It's just not worth it. The same thing with J2EE (to pick an example from a different realm): there are a lot of J2EE products that are not 1.4 compliant, even though the spec's been out for a long time, and 1.5/5.0 is almost ready. There are also a lot of applications which still run on pre-1.4 platforms. Even further away, how many people are running Windows 2000 or Office 2000? There's always a cost/benefit curve, and if you're on the wrong side, an upgrade doesn't make sense, no matter what it is. That doesn't mean you shouldn't use a framework, CF, or J2EE (I won't speak about Windows/Office ;) ). cheers, barneyb -- Barney Boisvert [EMAIL PROTECTED] 360.319.6145 http://www.barneyb.com/ Got Gmail? I have 100 invites. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:243037 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
