Here's another vote for ColdFusion. It's so easy to learn, balances simple syntax and advanced rapid-development features, and hooking into databases is ridiulously simple.
The cost of the production server can be an issue for developers of packaged solutions (in that, like ASP.NET, hosts sometimes charge extra for CF). But if you can host yourself, CF will save you a lot of money in development time. Blair On 11/23/06, Glen Lipka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I used Cold Fusion for years. It has a pretty committed community, although I wonder about Adobe's ability to keep it going properly. The inventors of CF have long since left Macromedia/Adobe. PHP is so easy to learn. It just works. It is today, what cold fusion was 10 years ago. (The fastest way to build something.) I have never met anyone who TRIED Python and didn't love it. ASP.net. Microsoft makes so many tools and they all hook into asp.net. If you want to hook into Exchange or Active Directory or Word or Excel or any of the microsoft stuff, you have to do asp.net. They have the dev tools and some REALLY advanced tools like Windows Workflow. The investment is heavier, and it is NOT easier, but man, they use the power of monopoly and integration to take it seriously. Ruby on Rails. All of the above have a Rails type env. I am not sure if Ruby on Rails is better than Symphony (PHP on Rails). Even CF has a rails concept. I don't know alot of people who use RoR for enterprise stuff. I know a couple who use the CF and PHP Rails concept. WebSphere, ATG Dynamo, Weblogic, any J2EE enterprise stack. Cost a fortune. Hard to use. hard to maintain. Avoid avoid. Alert! You have to look at who you have working with you, existing skills and integration requirements. Hope this is helpful. Glen _______________________________________________ jQuery mailing list [email protected] http://jquery.com/discuss/
_______________________________________________ jQuery mailing list [email protected] http://jquery.com/discuss/
