My comments are intermixed below On 30/05/07, schlub <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > I know it's dangerous to say this in this forum, but I would have to > agree that CF is a dying (though not dead) language based on my own > experiences with the CF industry. The fact is that teaching > institutions (Universities, TAFE etc) are churning out java / php / > asp.net developers' at large rate. No one I have met has learnt CF > unless the company they were working for was already using it. This > has created a shortage of developers, especially in Perth.
Yes I agree. There are a shortage of CF developers. There are also a shortage of all developers at the moment. To say CF is dying would indicate that Adobe don't want to invest in it any more. As for learning CF. Most ppl learn on the job as it takes only a short time to learn the language. The company I work for has many old CF projects and a few current ones > being finished off, and I have had the misfortune of working with this > code as much of it is largely procedural / mode based without any > inkling of functions / methods / objects (CFC's are a much spoken of > hidden treasure). Once these projects are finished we will probably > never start a new CF project and instead use ASP.NET or PHP. The > reasons? Financial costs, personnel, and portability. It sound like you have a distast for CF anyway. Some ppl like it others don't. That is fine and each to their own. Saying you would use ASP.NET or PHP over CF again sounds like a personal tast not an indication the CF is dying. Interesting you mention portablilty. Since when is ASP.NETportable. Since when is PHP portable between different databases? I would say that CF is the most portable language out of the lot. Being Java under the hood it makes it portable and distributable in a variety of formats. The cost of CF Server is prohibitively expensive when you compare it > to IIS or PHP (both free). The IDE is also not free, and let's face > it, Dreamweaver or Homesite are pretty average. That's not to say we > don't mind paying for good products, but the advantages of CF Server > and the benefits of upgrading just aren't tangible enough. I don't understand the comparson between CF and IIS. IIS can be compared to Apache but not CF. You can compare CF to any other application server you like but IIS is a web server. The IDE for CF that is mostly used for CF is now Eclipse. It is free and very good. Link it in with CFEclipse, FusionDebug, Mylar, etc and you have an integrated IDE for free. Most ppl agree the Dreamweaver and Homesite are pretty average although a few ppl I know swear by Homesite CF developers are quite simply impossible to come by - well at least > with any amount of experience. It's easy to find a competent > developer, but then you have to go through the time and expense of > training them in CF. If the industry is only churning out .net or php > developers then that's what we have to work with. You comment about developers is true of any language. Nothing new here. We have attempted to outsource to contractors in the eastern states > with appalling results - we were jerked around by two separate > contractors; one who assured us they were working on the system only > to vanish (literally), and the second came back several weeks after > the briefing to say they would be too busy for the next four months! > Suffice to say we will only be using local resources from now on. We > didn't lose any money, but we did lose 2 months development time and > ended up with a peeved customer. This sounds like a problem with your outsourcing arrangements and not a fault of the language. Portability speaks for itself... many (all?) hosting companies have > IIS or PHP servers, but the number of them that support CF is > dwindling. The number of companies supporting or developing in CF is > also dwindling. If our customers want to take their website to someone > else, they will be severely restricted in where they can go - some may > see this as a good thing, but we don't believe in making ourselves > indispensable to the detriment of the client. It's the same deal with > ASP (not ASP.NET) - a lot of companies simply aren't supporting it > anymore. Where do you get you figure from? Or don't you have any. ASP.nET is well supported and so is PHP, CF and most other languages around. I have no problems finding a good company that does CF hosting. I would also suggest that most clients that need a website also need their own server unless you are talking about tiny sites. If you need your own server then it doesn't matter what you put on it. CF has a lot of nice features, but discovering them can be a painful > process. Maybe so. That is what the different conference, news groups, documentation, books , etc are for. Anyway, these are just my experiences - I expect to get some flames > for this... :) This is not considered a flam response. I am just replying with my equally valid opinions on a language that has and does continue to serve my company well. schlub Cheers, Simon > > -- Cheers Simon Haddon --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "cfaussie" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cfaussie?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
