I don't have access to a solaris box, but I will install one if necessary. Do you have an actual code sample?
Russ > -----Original Message----- > From: Tom Kitta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, September 29, 2006 9:38 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: RE: CF vs. .NET presentations? > > Russ here is a memory leak example on CF: > > Try running text processing intenisve application (log parser) on CF 6.1 > on > Solaris... Has a big time memory leak, will crash. Run the same code on CF > 6.1. on Windows Server 2003 - stable. Here is your example. > > I am sure other platforms are not perfect, but you asked for a CF example, > > TK > > -----Original Message----- > From: Russ [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, September 29, 2006 7:01 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: RE: CF vs. .NET presentations? > > > If CF is deployed on Linux, half of your support would not be needed. If > you want to write some custom handlers, you can do those in java and plug > them into jrun. Nothing special about .NET here. > > Personally, I would like an example of a memory leak in CF. I don't doubt > that a lot of enterprises use .NET, but that's mostly due to microsoft's > marketing and getting .NET into schools and universities, something that > macromedia is not doing with CF. > > Personally, I would like an example of CF/Java code that causes a memory > leak. > > Russ > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Matthew Small [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Friday, September 29, 2006 6:30 PM > > To: CF-Talk > > Subject: Re: CF vs. .NET presentations? > > > > Sorry to chime in late, and after Mike said not to... I haven't been on > > this list in a long time either. However, this isn't about .NET vs. CF. > > It's to respond to Dave's comments. > > > > I know that Dave works in the DC area (please correct me if I'm wrong) > and > > DC is strong into CF with all of the government agencies. That's great, > > it's a good place to be becuase CF might be cheaper for a government > > agency to produce website or intranets. I know that they use Solaris a > > lot, so CF is a good place to be. > > > > However, it's simply absurd to suggest that Microsoft is not strong in > the > > enterprise segment. I currently work in Premier technical support for > > Microsoft supporting ASP.NET and IIS. The list of companies that use > > ASP.NET reads basically the same as the Fortune 500. I know because I've > > supported their technical issues, and they do some crazy programming > > tricks that CF simply isn't capable of, nor can Java do it either. It's > > not because CF is inferior at what it does, but because, as someone > > pointed out earlier, .NET can interact with the entire OS. Yes, these > > features are very important at the enterprise level. Event logging to > the > > System and Application event logs, or a custom log; multiple session > state > > stores; HTTPHandlers that can intercept incoming requests and modify > them; > > .NET remoting; Native support for XML data transformation from the SQL > > database; interoperability between classes written in different > languages; > > and most of all, enterprise support at a level that cannot be matched by > > anybody. > > > > One of the biggest things that can be said about MS products is that > they > > are supported, constantly. When you have a crash, we can tell you how > to > > capture a memory dump and then tell you exactly the line of code that > > caused it. When you have a memory leak, we can pick out the exact > object > > that the dev decided there should be millions of and how to work around > > it. When you need to secure your intranet applications to particular > > groups of users that exist on your corporate intranet, we use integrated > > windows authentication with a single sign on and your code can be > > protected using NTFS permissions. > > > > Yes, all of these things are more expensive overall than a guy writing > > some CF and deploying it to a server. But be assured that the > enterprise > > is where MS is entrenched. Millions of dollars are spent by big > companies > > on our contracts, and it's because they know when something goes wrong, > MS > > will be there to back it up 100%, and we can fix it. There's no level > of > > support like that from anybody else. > > > > But even better, we have professional support for the little guy. When > you > > write you own memory leak (and believe me, it can be done using JRUN and > > CF) we can tell you why that exists as well. Our professional support > > costs some money ($245) but that's cheap when you have a seriously > > important application that needs to be fixed NOW. > > > > Here are a few companies that I've had cases for, recently: > > Johnson & Johnson > > Fidelity Financial > > ExxonMobil > > Federal Reserve Back > > State Government of Masschusettes > > Parliament of Canada > > AARP > > > > > > We don't need a list like Ben Forta's. We're big time enterprise, way > > bigger than Dave would have you believe. We don't count the number of > > companies using .NET, we don't have to. Just search for the numbers of > > jobs available, that will tell you all you need to know. > > > > > > - Matt Small > > > > >It's always a bit unsettling for me to hear Microsoft products and > > >"enterprise" in the same sentence, even though I've long believed that > > they > > >can work in the enterprise. And yes, you can build mobile, web and > > desktop > > >applications with .NET - I'm a big fan of the .NET Compact Framework, > > >myself. But you're not building one application at that point, you're > > >building three applications. Those applications might share some common > > >components, and even some of the same presentation logic, but they'll > > still > > >be three distinct applications. And, aside from the web portions, your > > >Microsoft applications will only run on Microsoft products - you'll > have > > a > > >heck of a time deploying your .NET CF apps to Blackberries. > > > > > >Right now, the enterprise runs Java. CF integrates nicely with Java. > You > > >will simply not find too much .NET in enterprise environments yet. I'm > a > > big > > >fan of MS products, generally, and I think they're often better than > > they're > > >credited to be, but unless you buy into the idea of the "Microsoft > > stack", > > >where everything you use comes from Microsoft, you don't really have > > viable > > >solutions. Most enterprises have not bought into that idea yet. I don't > > know > > >if they ever will. > > > > > >Enterprise products are, and have always been, expensive. I strongly > > suspect > > >that Adobe would have difficulty selling CF as an enterprise product if > > they > > >lowered the price. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Introducing the Fusion Authority Quarterly Update. 80 pages of hard-hitting, up-to-date ColdFusion information by your peers, delivered to your door four times a year. http://www.fusionauthority.com/quarterly Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Talk/message.cfm/messageid:254890 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
