You'll never see any of my stuff, we have a HUGE CF intranet, but no
one will ever know about it except for me talking about it
Adam H
On Fri, 4 Feb 2005 16:42:03 -0500, dave <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> too me its like this, ms has a tendency to drop things everytime someone has
> somethin
too me its like this, ms has a tendency to drop things everytime someone has
something new (look no futher than asp or google type searches or anti-spyware,
which is hilarious because their browser installs the spyware then u gotta pay
them to buy their ani-spyware to get rid of it and make them
: Ben Forta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, February 04, 2005 1:47 PM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: RE: Coldfusion VS ASP.NET use
>
> Dave, honestly, I don't think anyone really knows the answer
> to that one.
> But it is clear that some technologies tend to
he he me 2!
that damn glorified frontpage junk! hahaha
From: Will Tomlinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, February 04, 2005 3:33 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: Coldfusion VS ASP.NET use
I'm gonna be a good boy and stay out of this one!
Good idea ;)
Rey...
- Original Message -
From: "Will Tomlinson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "CF-Talk"
Sent: Friday, February 04, 2005 2:33 PM
Subject: Re: Coldfusion VS ASP.NET use
> I'm gonna be a good boy and sta
I'm gonna be a good boy and stay out of this one!
:)
Will
~|
Logware (www.logware.us): a new and convenient web-based time tracking
application. Start tracking and documenting hours spent on a project or with a
client with Lo
s any
extrapolation of total use based on public facing use.
--- Ben
-Original Message-
From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, February 04, 2005 12:57 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Coldfusion VS ASP.NET use
> And keep in mind that over 80% of CF use is internal stuff
> And keep in mind that over 80% of CF use is internal stuff,
> behind firewalls, stuff Google will never see.
Isn't that equally true for every other web application server technology?
Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software
http://www.figleaf.com/
Fig Leaf Software provides the highest caliber ven
> -Original Message-
> From: Mark A Kruger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, February 04, 2005 9:57 AM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: RE: Coldfusion VS ASP.NET use
>
> Recall that many asp sites use "default.asp" ... not index.asp, whereas
> CF&#x
Surely this is abundantly obvious, ASP/.NET has a much larger
saturation than CF, you don't need to google to know that...just open
your eyes a little.
--
Neil
http://www.theservicefactory.com
Get Firefox - http://www.getfirefox.com
~
er? {snip}
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Bert Dawson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Friday, February 04, 2005 8:43 AM
> > To: CF-Talk
> > Subject: Re: Coldfusion VS ASP.NET use
> >
> > index
d "default.aspx" (for ASP.NET). What are the results for those?
>
> Vince
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Bert Dawson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Friday, February 04, 2005 8:43 AM
> > To: CF-Talk
> > Subject: Re: Coldfusion VS ASP.
Searching 'fuseaction' in google turns up 12,700,000.
A lot of pages from US Senate and House. The gov't clearly endorses Fusebox
and CF. Hmmm, is this a good thing? ;)
Mark
>That means that there are bigger sites for CFM?
>how about fusebox? each site would be index.cfm and that is pretty
rom: Bert Dawson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, February 04, 2005 8:43 AM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: Re: Coldfusion VS ASP.NET use
>
> index.cfm: about 17,600,000
> index.asp: about 16,600,000
>
> Looks like an open and shut case.
> :)
>
> Cheers
> Ber
82,700,000 for inurl:.aspx. (0.08 seconds)
> Results 1 - 10 of about 129,000,000 for inurl:.cfm. (0.28 seconds)
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Mark A Kruger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, February 04, 2005 10:01 AM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: RE: Coldfusion VS A
a [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, February 04, 2005 7:48 AM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: RE: Coldfusion VS ASP.NET use
>
> And keep in mind that over 80% of CF use is internal stuff, behind
> firewalls, stuff Google will never see.
>
> --- Ben
>
> -Original M
10:01 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Coldfusion VS ASP.NET use
Recall that many asp sites use "default.asp" ... not index.asp, whereas CF's
"index.cfm" is far more standard.
-Mark
-Original Message-
From: Ben Forta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, Februar
Recall that many asp sites use "default.asp" ... not index.asp, whereas CF's
"index.cfm" is far more standard.
-Mark
-Original Message-
From: Ben Forta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, February 04, 2005 7:48 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Coldfusion VS ASP.N
And the fact the asp uses Default.asp a lot of the time.
-Original Message-
From: Calvin Ward [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 04 February 2005 13:51
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Coldfusion VS ASP.NET use
How about .aspx?
-Original Message-
From: Ben Forta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED
How about .aspx?
-Original Message-
From: Ben Forta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, February 04, 2005 8:48 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Coldfusion VS ASP.NET use
And keep in mind that over 80% of CF use is internal stuff, behind
firewalls, stuff Google will never see.
--- Ben
And keep in mind that over 80% of CF use is internal stuff, behind
firewalls, stuff Google will never see.
--- Ben
-Original Message-
From: Bert Dawson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, February 04, 2005 8:43 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: Coldfusion VS ASP.NET use
index.cfm
index.cfm: about 17,600,000
index.asp: about 16,600,000
Looks like an open and shut case.
:)
Cheers
Bert
ps and after a quick check (google on site:www.mysite.com) i reckon
about 4% of those 17 million are mine!
On Fri, 4 Feb 2005 10:59:48 +, Mark Drew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I found
Just a comment:
Personally, I wouldn't spend any of my professional time learning C#. I predict it
will be just a few short years before Microsoft once again orphans it's own product
and throws away C# for some other buzzword that has strategic and marketing value at
the time.
At 04:45 PM 12/1
> I must confess that my original concern seems to be so
> adequately captured by Dave Watts' insight into how Microsoft
> operates. Yes the market for web application servers is
> competitive, and for someone (like myself) who keeps falling
> back on CF as a prefered development platform, rea
> I think just about everyone hates Dallas now, but I'm partial
> living in the D.C. area.
It's a pretty nice area, I think.
> By the way, your clustering lesson at the DC CFUG last week was
> excellent.
Thanks! I'm glad you enjoyed it!
Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software
http://www.figleaf.
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, December 11, 2000 7:37 PM
Subject: Re: ColdFusion vs. ASP.NET
> I must confess that my original concern seems to be so adequately captured
> by Dave Watt's insight into how Microsoft operates. Yes
-- Original Message -
From: "Dave Watts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2000 6:37 AM
Subject: RE: ColdFusion vs. ASP.NET
: > hehe.. I think it's funny slamming on Microsoft products in
: > here. If ev
lt;[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, December 11, 2000 3:07 PM
Subject: RE: ColdFusion vs. ASP.NET
> > hehe.. I think it's funny slamming on Microsoft products in
> > here. If everyone who ran ColdFusion on NT left the list, how
> > many would be left.
> >
> >
> hehe.. I think it's funny slamming on Microsoft products in
> here. If everyone who ran ColdFusion on NT left the list, how
> many would be left.
>
> It just occurred to me that MS is the Dallas Cowboys of the
> software industry.. you either love em or hate em .. no
> in-between.
I gene
hehe.. I think it's funny slamming on Microsoft products in here. If
everyone who ran ColdFusion on NT left the list, how many would be
left.
It just occurred to me that MS is the Dallas Cowboys of the software
industry.. you either love em or hate em .. no in-between.
For an interesting read
> Everyone insists on considering ASP.NET etc vapor ware...?
> You can download pretty functional beta's of the software.
>
> To me that makes it a little more than "vaporware". Just
> my opinon but the beta's are rather useable and you can get
> ahold of them now.
I wasn't INSISTING that ASP.NET
GeeI wonder why?
At 10:44 AM 12/11/00 -0600, you wrote:
>Not to mention the fact
>that if the technology belongs to any companies out of Redmond, the
>negativity seems to double.
~~
Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the
known as ASP+
>
> Jeremy Allen
> ElliptIQ Inc.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Philip Arnold - ASP [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, December 11, 2000 9:59 AM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: RE: ColdFusion vs. ASP.NET
>
> > It's hard to com
> Why is it..
>
> Everyone insists on considering ASP.NET etc vapor ware...?
> You can download pretty functional beta's of the software.
Based on my previous experience with Microsoft betas, there are likely to be
very significant changes between now and the final release.
In any case, I think
ASP.NET was formerly known as ASP+
Jeremy Allen
ElliptIQ Inc.
-Original Message-
From: Philip Arnold - ASP [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, December 11, 2000 9:59 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: ColdFusion vs. ASP.NET
> It's hard to compare an existing product with one th
> It's hard to compare an existing product with one that doesn't
> exist yet. I suspect that .NET won't be all that different from
> how MS guys use ASP and COM now, anyway.
>
> In any case, by the time that .NET is a real product, CF 5 will
> probably be a real product too.
I have a fantastic pi
> The recent thread of discussion on CF vs PHP/ASP is pretty
> old hat by now. I thought I might throw in something that
> hasn't been mentioned yet. Does anyone have any opinion how
> CF 4.5 will compete with ASP.NET (previously called ASP+)
> when MS releases it next year? Will CF's next maj
37 matches
Mail list logo
