On Saturday 14 Jun 2003 21:19 pm, Jim Davis wrote:
downgrade). It's fast, capable, and (most importantly for some) is
still C++ and some runs their COM infrastructure components like MX
can't.
cough
Look at the sky out there today great shades of red...
cough
--
Tom C
Land of the free,
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: CF Compatability
On Saturday 14 Jun 2003 21:19 pm, Jim Davis wrote:
downgrade). It's fast, capable, and (most importantly for some) is
still C++ and some runs their COM infrastructure components like MX
can't.
cough
Look at the sky out there today great shades of red
hm, I think that in the end it would come to Macromedia's benefit if other
companies supported ColdFusion as an open standard. These companies could
concentrate on business that Macromedia cannot or does not want to cover. It
would heighten the credibility of ColdFusion which in turn would help
Does Microsoft have a 'specification' for the .ASP language?
I didn't understand at first how New Atlanta was able to use CFML in the
first place.
I was under the impression that it would all have been copyrighted by
Allaire, and didn't pay it much attention
Since I felt New Atlanta would have
to make
a tag
or function work... in that case.. i dont think copyright is an issue.
Joe Eugene
- Original Message -
From: Angel Stewart [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 16, 2003 9:25 AM
Subject: RE: CF Compatability
Does Microsoft have
]
To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 16, 2003 10:29 AM
Subject: Re: CF Compatability
Does Microsoft have a 'specification' for the .ASP language?
MS ASP (Active Server Pages) has it own evolution as any other platform.
Today ASP is generally called CLASSIC ASP(classic Asp has it own
I wouldnt think so, I would say that trying to trademark on cfquery would
be very very hard to try and enforce - and would probably never happen.
-Original Message-
From: Calvin Ward [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 16 June 2003 15:45
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: CF Compatability
It seems
Joe Eugene wrote:
But..I suppose I was wrong. Is it not possible to 'copyright' a
programming language itself?
Can you copyright some tags you wrote in ColdFusion.. Yes i think so.. even
some developers sell their tags Developer Exchange etc..
Copyright protects against verbatim copies of
cfquerytm
I wouldnt think so, I would say that trying to trademark on
cfquery would
be very very hard to try and enforce - and would probably
never happen.
~|
Archives:
Keep in mind I was avoiding the use of any term like trademark, copyright or
anything like that.
:P
- Original Message -
From: Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 16, 2003 10:47 AM
Subject: RE: CF Compatability
I wouldnt think
: Sunday, June 15, 2003 1:28 AM
Subject: Re: CF Compatability
The Lexus-Toyota debate...
More than a couple on the list placed the concept of a few bucks being
the difference between MX and BD free version...
First, I may be working more hours than I ever did, however most
What I don't get is how some of you guys work for shops that charge over
$100 an hour but are only making 40k a year or so.
so lets say 40 hour week that's 2080 hours a year @ $100 an hour = 208k a
year. If you took home 1/2 that's 104k a year. That's a decent living,
even
in NY.
If you
At 04:58 AM 6/15/03 -0400, you wrote:
If you're free-lancing things are only marginally better. You don't quite
have to multiply by 3, since you don't have the overhead, but you do need to
multiply by 2.5 since you'll be paying all the FICA taxes, insurance, etc
There's a LOT more to it... Let's
my god I wasn't canning you!
Trying to understand how how you guys do it.
looks like poor business management to me
- Original Message -
From: Rafael Alan Bleiweiss [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2003 7:49 AM
Subject: Re: CF Compatability
My main problem with all of this is that we're still only comparing
implementations, not specifications.
Having a real CFML specification (instead of just usage documentation)
would make so many things so much easier, I think.
Jim Davis
President, http://www.depressedpress.com
Webmaster,
-Original Message-
From: Jim Davis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2003 1:02 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: CF Compatability
My main problem with all of this is that we're still only comparing
implementations, not specifications.
Having a real CFML specification
Among others, Introducing the technology to new implementers, provide a pathway
for a start up to build experience and follow an upgrade path that will be
profitable.
==
Stop spam on your domain, use our gateway!
For hosting solutions http://www.clickdoug.com
Huh? You believe they should give the fruits of their hard work to others
for free? You're kidding right??
chris
-Original Message-
From: Doug White [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2003 12:23 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: CF Compatability
Among others, Introducing
By new implementers do you mean someone who would be competing against MM
for server sales?
Ken
-Original Message-
From: Doug White [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2003 3:23 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: CF Compatability
Among others, Introducing the technology to new
==
If you are not satisfied with my service, my job isn't done!
- Original Message -
From: Ken Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2003 2:37 PM
Subject: RE: CF Compatability
| By new implementers do you mean
-
From: Ken Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2003 2:37 PM
Subject: RE: CF Compatability
| By new implementers do you mean someone who would be competing against MM
| for server sales?
|
| Ken
|
|
| -Original Message-
| From: Doug White
And there is a FREE trial download of CFMX...what's your point?
chris
-Original Message-
From: Doug White [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2003 3:27 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: CF Compatability
perhaps a better choice of words should have been customers
Trial versions
are not satisfied with my service, my job isn't done!
- Original Message -
From: Chris Kief [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2003 5:37 PM
Subject: RE: CF Compatability
| And there is a FREE trial download of CFMX...what's your point?
|
| chris
White [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2003 4:44 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: CF Compatability
Read the whole thread, and you will have your answer.
==
Stop spam on your domain, use our gateway!
For hosting solutions http://www.clickdoug.com
ISP
Dave,
I do appreciate your desire to understand, however this email, as in the
last one, has come across as judgementally attacking with a foundation
based in a very limited undedstanding. Intended or not, that's just how it
comes across. Poor business management how?
Because an individual
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2003 1:42 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: CF Compatability
What's the incentive to give away CF, the test suites or the language
to
New Atalnta and others?
I'm not sure if this
but please note that substantially compatible is different than being
compatible.
Damon,
I think your compatibility point is well taken. But it would carry much more
weight when delivered by people outside of either camp. For example what a
Mike Dinowitz or Hal Helms or Howie Hamlin have to
|
| Give us documented features and explicit behaviour on a stable product,
| that's what CF people want.
|
That is exactly what they are doing!
Doug
~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4
: Re: CF Compatability
but please note that substantially compatible is different than being
compatible.
Damon,
I think your compatibility point is well taken. But it would carry much
more
weight when delivered by people outside of either camp. For example what a
Mike Dinowitz or Hal
~sure a Lexus is a Toyota but a Toyota definitely isn't a Lexus~
if you know what I am saying ;)
- Original Message -
From: Damon Cooper [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, June 14, 2003 12:51 PM
Subject: CF Compatability
Ok, it's Saturday morning, and I'm
Hey Damon, how can I take on someone who loves me to death? :-) Seriously,
thanks for those kind words, and of course you know I've always appreciated
what you and many at MM have done for the CFML community as well. Thanks for
recognizing that this really is about our mutual interests in
.
/charlie
-Original Message-
From: Dave Lyons [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, June 14, 2003 3:15 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: CF Compatability
~sure a Lexus is a Toyota but a Toyota definitely isn't a Lexus~
if you know what I am saying
..nope:)(the girls like
it)
dave
- Original Message -
From: Charlie Arehart [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, June 14, 2003 3:28 PM
Subject: RE: CF Compatability
The inference isn't such a bad one, considering the tremendous respect
Toyota has
[Just to get out of work for a minute; not as a direct response to
anybody.]
Personally at this point I'm not sure I care about (small)
incompatibilities between CF5 and BD.
I've been working with CF since version 1.5. Due to circumstances (my
location and the fact my company was an early
: RE: CF Compatability
[Just to get out of work for a minute; not as a direct response to
anybody.]
Personally at this point I'm not sure I care about (small)
incompatibilities between CF5 and BD.
I've been working with CF since version 1.5. Due to circumstances (my
location and the fact my
, June 14, 2003 4:20 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: CF Compatability
[Just to get out of work for a minute; not as a direct response to
anybody.]
Personally at this point I'm not sure I care about (small)
incompatibilities between CF5 and BD.
I've been working with CF since version 1.5. Due
But will I give up my Lexus for a Toyota..nope:)(the girls
like
it)
dave
then you haven't seen my Toyota :)
by the way, *IF* this is the analogy you mean, then you're making Charlie's
case for him, since it's what's under the hood that counts -- otherwise all
we're doing is
]
Sent: Saturday, June 14, 2003 5:05 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: CF Compatability
Jim this is a great email with some very well thought through points (My
app conforms to CFML 5.1) love that thought. Just want to throw
a viewpoint
in here; we have been working with a large Enterprise level IBM
:52 PM
Subject: Re: CF Compatability
But will I give up my Lexus for a Toyota..nope:)(the girls
like
it)
dave
then you haven't seen my Toyota :)
by the way, *IF* this is the analogy you mean, then you're making
Charlie's
case for him, since it's what's under the hood
-Original Message-
From: Charlie Arehart [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, June 14, 2003 5:48 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: CF Compatability
Jim, lots of interesting points.
We absolutely agree that many shops are still at 4.5 (if 5), and they
may
be
facing (as you
On Saturday, Jun 14, 2003, at 14:04 US/Pacific, Mike Brunt wrote:
we have been working with a large Enterprise level IBM Shop for the
past 2.5 years or so. They are on a crusade to change a lot of the
legacy
main-frame'ish applications over to web-based applications. Also they
are
to either just run your CFML apps
there, or integrate, or if you choose later, rewrite.
/charlie
-Original Message-
From: Dave Lyons [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, June 14, 2003 8:15 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: CF Compatability
depends on how you look at it
if you have ever
Message-
From: Jim Davis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, June 14, 2003 9:01 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: CF Compatability
-Original Message-
From: Charlie Arehart [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, June 14, 2003 5:48 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: CF Compatability
On Saturday, Jun 14, 2003, at 18:00 US/Pacific, Jim Davis wrote:
Unfortunately I'm pretty sure. My company (New England Financial) was
actually bought by MetLife. Met is heavily IBM-centric and is
following
the IBM How to deploy web applications handbook step-by-step.
Our (currently
I think I've already addressed this point a couple times, Sean. Perhaps in
the flurry of notes, you'd not seen that before offering this point. If you
had, then let's just let our two positions stand in apposition.
/charlie
snip
Well, that's already the case because Blue Dragon doesn't support
PROTECTED]
(902)368-1895 ext.242
-Original Message-
From: Charlie Arehart [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: June 14, 2003 10:08 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: CF Compatability
Dave, clearly, if you're at CFMX already, we're not a solution for you.
And
again we're not even seeking to draw
PROTECTED]
To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, June 14, 2003 5:52 PM
Subject: Re: CF Compatability
But will I give up my Lexus for a Toyota..nope:)(the girls
like
it)
dave
then you haven't seen my Toyota :)
by the way, *IF* this is the analogy you
47 matches
Mail list logo
