I just moved to a dedicated environment
and have therefore had to closely consider all my software costs. Enterprise is
ridiculously priced! There is a gap in MM’s pricing model. I
understand what they’re trying to do. If you’re a public hosting
company that’s going to host 200+ clients with the same copy of CF, then
it makes sense then you should pay some dollars. But what about the little
guy? I host under 30 sites and it’s only because I developed them.
Is it reasonable for me to pay 200$/site just to be able to use gateways?
MM should have a more gradual pricing
scheme based on number of domains like many other companies do. And every copy
of CF should come with ALL the features. Why does my environment have to be
insecure (sandbox) just because I can’t afford to dish out 6G. Shouldn’t
security come standard? Maybe they should also start charging for specific TAGS.
CFQuery? 20 bucks. Oh, you need arrays do ya – 30 bucks.
This is how it should be:
- 1000$
for 20 domains/IPs
- 2000$
for 50 domains/IPs
- 3800$
for 100 domains/IPs
- 5500$
for 100+
And as for gateways, I disagree completely
that they are for big apps – I developed a tiny app that allows you to
search the Yellowpages thru Google Talk, and now I’m not sure how I’m
going to deploy it….
Baz
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Peter Hardy
Sent: Monday, November 07, 2005
5:52 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [CFCDev] Factory
Pattern
Each platform has its advantages and disadvantages but each
platform must also remain competitive in the space. In that regard I'm not
convinced that Coldfusion is holding it's own against for example Asp.Net.
If Coldfusion doesn't remain competitive then market share is likely to
decline and consequently development opportunities. I don't have any
statistical evidence to show that Coldfusion is in decline but the number
of of job postings seems to be decreasing and thats not generally a good sign.
As for asynchronous processing, I don't believe that this is an Enterprise feature. The
company I work for develops lots of small applications that will interface with
third-party solutions. In this situation Asynchronous processing is important.
It doesn't however mean that these applications are Enterprise applications.
Cheers, Pete (aka lad4bear)
On 07/11/05, Barney
Boisvert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
If you can develop an ASP.NET app faster than a CF app, and it's just
as easy to maintain, then you're definitely doing yourself a
disservice by using CF at all, licensing costs aside. But on the
flip
side, how many companies purchase CF over other solutions? So
someone
obviously sees a value to it.
I'd hate to digress into a pissing match, but pick the best tool for
the job, and use it to the best of your abilities. If it's CF,
great,
if it's not, great. Long as you keep getting paid, it's all pretty
irrelevant.
As for async processing, I think it's justifiable to make that
enterprise only. Certainly custom gateways are an
enterprise-level
feature. Async processing is also a fairly "advanced" need
that isn't
really present until you get to larger applications. And if you
really have a need, you can fake it pretty easily (though not as
efficiently) with CFHTTP.
cheers,
barneyb
On 11/6/05, Peter Hardy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Sean,
>
> It's not often I disagree with you but on this occasion I think I do.
>
> When hunting for contracts / customers, we're competing with companies who
> are using JSP, Asp.Net etc. The competition can set the whole thing up
> without the licensing overhead which we have to pass onto the Customer.
For
> smaller apps (the kind where we would consider using shared hosting for)
> this gives the JSP / Asp.Net developers a competitive advantage. Given
that
> Coldfusion is sold (to some extent) on how good it is for building
> <emp>small sites</emp> quickly, your argument seems a little
> counter-intutive.
>
> It could be argued that the speed of development using Coldfusion would
> offset the cost of the license but I don't think this is strong argument.
> Personally, I can build a web app in Asp.Net more quickly than in
> Coldfusion. And once I've finished an application I can roll it out to as
> many clients as I want (maximising return on time / effort /money
invested)
> without having to pay additional license fees.
>
> And be honest, the license fee for Enterprise
version of CF is completely
> insane.
>
> Cheers Pete (aka lad4bear)
>
> PS: I'd also appreciate it if you can tell me who's idea it was to make
> Asynchrous Processing an Enterprise
only feature, cos I think I need to have
> a ...ahem ... little word (4 letters to be precise) with them ;)
>
--
Barney Boisvert
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
360.319.6145
http://www.barneyb.com/
Got Gmail? I have 100 invites.
----------------------------------------------------------
You are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, send an email to [email protected] with the words
'unsubscribe cfcdev' as the subject of the email.
CFCDev is run by CFCZone (www.cfczone.org)
and supported by CFXHosting ( www.cfxhosting.com).
An archive of the CFCDev list is available at www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
----------------------------------------------------------
You are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, send an email to
[email protected] with the words 'unsubscribe cfcdev' as the subject of the
email.
CFCDev is run by CFCZone (www.cfczone.org) and supported by CFXHosting
(www.cfxhosting.com).
An archive of the CFCDev list is available at
www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
----------------------------------------------------------