>That's why I was wondering if anyone knew what
> future versions of CF had to offer in the face of ASP.NET's code/content
> separation, easier extensibility, and its integration with .NET web
> services.
java
----- Original Message -----
From: "Leong Yew" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, December 11, 2000 7:37 PM
Subject: Re: ColdFusion vs. ASP.NET
> I must confess that my original concern seems to be so adequately captured
> by Dave Watt's insight into how Microsoft operates. Yes the market for web
> application servers is competitive, and for someone (like myself) who
keeps
> falling back on CF as a prefered development platform, reading Richard
> Anderson et al. 's A Preview of Active Server Pages+ (Wrox) left me a
little
> concerned about whether or not CF developers will be left behind when
> ASP.NET becomes a reality. That's why I was wondering if anyone knew what
> future versions of CF had to offer in the face of ASP.NET's code/content
> separation, easier extensibility, and its integration with .NET web
> services.
>
> By the way, that remark about "vaporware" understates the extent of
ASP.NET
> availability. A few web hosts are already offering hosting with that
option
> installed, some of them for free.
>
> Leong
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Dave Watts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2000 6:37 AM
> Subject: RE: ColdFusion vs. ASP.NET
>
>
> : > hehe.. I think it's funny slamming on Microsoft products in
> : > here. If everyone who ran ColdFusion on NT left the list, how
> : > many would be left.
> : >
> : > It just occurred to me that MS is the Dallas Cowboys of the
> : > software industry.. you either love em or hate em .. no
> : > in-between.
> :
> : I generally like most MS products, but the original question was how CF
> : compares to ASP.NET. The fact that this kind of question can be knocked
> : around so casually - about products that don't exist yet - demonstrates
> how
> : Microsoft often operates. They come up with new acronyms faster than
they
> : can get rid of the merchandise that uses the old acronyms. Anyone
remember
> : Microsoft DNA? How about COM+, Storage+, Forms+? Then, they push the new
> : acronym as if it, by itself, has some meaning and use. Eventually, they
> get
> : a product out that usually fulfills some, but not all, of the promised
> : feature set for the new acronym.
> :
> : To feel like I understand a product initiative, I like to be able to
> : summarize it in a single sentence. I haven't seen that summary for .NET
> yet,
> : even though the product is in beta. The best explanation I've seen is
the
> : Dr. Gui column on MSDN, but even that is pretty buzzword-thick.
> :
> : When NT 3.1 came out, it was not very good, but Microsoft was still able
> to
> : take the OS/2 market with promises about the future. Those promises
didn't
> : come close to reality until NT 3.51.
> :
> : Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software
> : http://www.figleaf.com/
> : voice: (202) 797-5496
> : fax: (202) 797-5444
> :
> :
>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at
http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
