Rick,
1. If you're parsing .NET libs via .NET syntax in BD, then it *IS*
.NET. No logical argument can refute that.
2. Dev times 3X? No. As someone that knows .NET and CF, the dev times
are equivalent. This is especially true with .NET 2.0 (3.0 is about to
rollout). Sorry, the old dev time arguments haven't held up since .NET
1.0.
3. .NET is much more efficient and has faster data access when using
MS SQL and has baked in session management which allows MS SQL to
handle your session tracking.
I love CF and will continue to use it for small clients. But how many
clients do you author sites for with a preceding development question
being, "Your long-term business plan for this site is for it to stay
small, right?"
-- Phil
----->
Back to your statement about .NET competing CF in terms of performance issues
with scale, I totally agree, but not every site is going to need to scale to an
enterprise-level application. In my mind, .NET is overkill for a
small-to-medium sized site especially if speed-to-market is a concern. If I
needed a database for a small-to-medium scale application, would I get Oracle
or DB2 in case I would ever need it, or would I get something that fits my
needs now (maybe MS SQL Server or MySQL)? Even if you chose .NET, would you
architect your application to scale 10x larger just in case even if there's no
proof that it would ever scale that large, but would take possibly 3x as long
to develop?
I think MySpace is a very good example of the limits of ColdFusion's scale, and
it was something that I'm sure a lot of people were wondering about.
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Phillip Holmes
Sent: Sun 11/5/2006 7:56 AM
To: Dallas/Fort Worth ColdFusion User Group Mailing List
Subject: Re: [DFW CFUG] Why Cold Fusion vs Java? vs PHP? vs .ASP? etc.
1.
> Sorry, you can't say MySpace is "entirely" .NET and still have "parts of
> the site" running CF. Even if we're talking about CFMX as a .NET
> assembly, it's still CF as a language, not CF as a server that's running
> at least the presentation layer.
2.
> I wouldn't hesitate in believing it if
> I heard they were migrating from CF to .NET on the language side based
> on the issues they've had with performance and scale.
>
1. .NET framework parses the page, therefore its .NET
2. Performance and licensing.
3. Computerjobs.com just ditched CF too for exactly the same reasons.
http://members.microsoft.com/CustomerEvidence/Common/FileOpen.aspx?FileName=10625_ComputerJobs_bizversion_300k.wvx
Its time all of us become ambidextrous developers with .NET + CF as
tools. CF is losing it's biggest sites one by one because of
outrageous pricing for the enterprise product, poor support by adobe
and performance issues.
For a onsey twosey server site, its not an issue but once you start
playing with the big boys, CF doesn't make financial sense.
--Phil
_______________________________________________
Reply to DFWCFUG:
[email protected]
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists1.safesecureweb.com/mailman/listinfo/list
List Archives:
http://www.mail-archive.com/list%40list.dfwcfug.org/
http://www.mail-archive.com/list%40dfwcfug.org/
DFWCFUG Sponsors:
www.HostMySite.com
www.teksystems.com/
_______________________________________________
Reply to DFWCFUG:
[email protected]
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists1.safesecureweb.com/mailman/listinfo/list
List Archives:
http://www.mail-archive.com/list%40list.dfwcfug.org/
http://www.mail-archive.com/list%40dfwcfug.org/
DFWCFUG Sponsors:
www.HostMySite.com
www.teksystems.com/
--
Warmest Regards,
Phillip B. Holmes
_______________________________________________
Reply to DFWCFUG:
[email protected]
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists1.safesecureweb.com/mailman/listinfo/list
List Archives:
http://www.mail-archive.com/list%40list.dfwcfug.org/
http://www.mail-archive.com/list%40dfwcfug.org/
DFWCFUG Sponsors:
www.HostMySite.com
www.teksystems.com/
