----- Original Message -----
From: "David E. Crawford" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, April 21, 2001 11:08 PM
> No one accused CF of being cheap to host but the fact is that it was never
> targeted to the individual developer. CF Enterprise is expensive, but I am
> sure others can attest to this -it is still possible to develop killer
> applications using CF Professional. CF may not be the best tool for the
> solo consultant, working hand to mouth on projects - but it is still
What are the thoughts about the future competition from "ASP.NET" - especially
since Macromedia will clearly have to support both CF and ASP.NET in one way or
the other.
I would always go with CF all things being equal, e.g. using my own servers, but
a great irritation over here in Britain, is that most hosting providers for
Windows NT/2000 will not support CF - only ASP. That means that is someone wants
CF at a co-lo centre - it isn't good.
To be controversial for a moment - maybe Macromedia should do a deal with
Microsoft to integrate a version Cold Fusion services directly in the Windows
2000 O/S? After all - Macromedia are fundamentally a web development tool
company, and M$ want to sell Windows 2000 to as many people as possible - and
the market for CF developers expands many times.
As an aside - anyone know of any good CF hosting companies over here? Otherwise,
which are the best of the well connected ones in the US?
Adrian Cooper.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at
http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
