> CF is the right tool for 95% (a rough guess) of the clients involved
> with the developers on this list.
Likely an accurate statement given the parameters. But not realistic on a much
larger scale.
&_david++;
Daniel Eben Elmore wrote:
"Your long-term business plan for this site is for it to stay small,
right?"
Meh, it's called reality. Let's flip the argument by telling them "We've
decided to use a platform that will require 3X times the man hours, just in
case you become the next MySpace or Yahoo."
I think this whole discussion has gone sour. The right tool for the right
job. CF is the right tool for 95% (a rough guess) of the clients involved
with the developers on this list.
-Daniel Elmore
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Phillip Holmes
Sent: Sunday, November 05, 2006 4:10 PM
To: Dallas/Fort Worth ColdFusion User Group Mailing List
Subject: Re: [DFW CFUG] Why Cold Fusion vs Java? vs PHP? vs .ASP? etc.
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
_______________________________________________
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/
