Perhaps it did digress a bit from the initial question but not much. When
the statement was made about scrapping Spectra due to performance, I made a
post about how we'd gotten around those issues. Were it not for this
solution, we would be dumping Spectra. Since supercache is a free,
non-encrypted tag from devex, it isn't as if I'm promoting a commercial
product which I might profit from.
Ed, do you actually use Spectra? My initial instinct is to respond to you
in the manner and tone which you have set but that doesn't really benefit
the discussion.
"Ed
McLaughlin" To: Spectra-Talk
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<edmcl@svmedi cc:
a.com> Subject: Keeping Spectra - When On Topics
Go Off
06/18/2002
03:51 PM
Please
respond to
spectra-talk
Friends,
I've started a new thread here that is specifically about how and why the
other thread went off-topic. Please keep this thread on-topic.
Here's what Tom was asking for in his original thread:
>>But if you don't mind sharing, please share the list what you, your
company or your
>>clients (names not needed) are planning to do in regard to Spectra. Or
>>just chip in your two cents on the best course of action.
You guys are obviously planning to eliminate pages, use containers, enhance
performance with caching, flatten pages and other wonderful things that
help
you overcome the inherent limitations and flaws of Spectra. In essence,
you're sort of walking around the sinking ship finding better ways to
organize the folding chairs on the Lido Deck. More power to you.
I think the original thread was posted in search of ideas on how to plan
for
a world without Spectra.
I think this can serve as an interesting case study of how and where
listserv threads go off-topic. Let's take a closer look, shall we?
I think I've identified where things got lost. It all happened innocently
enough. Dave Francis replied that his group was replacing Spectra due to
performance problems. Pretty on-topic. Then Russell came back suggesting
that if the performance problems could be overcome, the investment in
Spectra might still be worthwhile. Still on-topic - handle performance
problems and stick with the Spectra investment. Then, BOOM!, right here
Shawn gives us this:
>>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>>>>Sent: 18 June 2002 17:43
>>>>To: Spectra-Talk
>>>>Subject: RE: Keeping Spectra?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>With an aggressive caching strategy using cfsupercache rather
>>>>than cfcache
>>>>we've knocked out most of the performance problems.
>>>>
Now this is good information, but where's the topic tie-in? Sure, the
performance problems are knocked-out, but do we keep Spectra or not? No
opinion offered. Well, that just turns it into a field day. Russell can
barely contain himself and we've launched off into a discussion of
flattening, rendering, containers, anti-containers...
Maybe Shawn could shed some light on his thinking here. At what point did
you think promoting cfsupercache would help us get a better handle on what
your plans were for Spectra?
- Ed
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>>Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2002 1:51 PM
>>To: Spectra-Talk
>>Subject: RE: Keeping Spectra?
>>
>>
>>It has to do with whether or not we are keeping Spectra and
>>why. If you are
>>a Spectra developer then you should just be glad to hear
>>someone discussing
>>it in a positive manner or even discussing it at all. In case
>>you didn't
>>notice the forum is spectra-talk. If you don't want to hear
>>about Spectra,
>>then unsubscribe. We weren't talking about anything OT.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> "Ed
>>
>> McLaughlin" To: Spectra-Talk
>><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> <edmcl@svmedi cc:
>>
>> a.com> Subject: RE:
>>Keeping Spectra?
>>
>>
>> 06/18/2002
>>
>> 01:53 PM
>>
>> Please
>>
>> respond to
>>
>> spectra-talk
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>What does any of this have to do with the original question?
>>
>>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>>From: Russell Brown [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>>>>Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2002 1:43 PM
>>>>To: Spectra-Talk
>>>>Subject: RE: Keeping Spectra?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>That is a great strategy.
>>>>
>>>>We try and do something similar with our shopping channel, 4
>>>>pages create over 300 static pages, and our kiosk site works
>>>>on the same principal. We DO use containers as we find the
>>>>versatility that publishing rules afford us invaluable
>>>>(scheduling, objects displayed due to relevant meta data etc)
>>>>but where possible , we put content straight to the page.
>>>>
>>>>But what this shows is that there is a great variety of
>>>>techniques used to overrcome spectra's short comings that are
>>>>"out there" and being used. That is why I think we should
>>>>stick with Spectra : it would be a shame to chuck all our
>>>>expertise away and start again over such a small matter as
>>>>support (especially since on the whole we have solved our
>>>>problems, not MM)
>>>>
>>>>regards
>>>>
>>>>Russell
>>>>
>>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>>>>Sent: 18 June 2002 18:24
>>>>To: Spectra-Talk
>>>>Subject: RE: Keeping Spectra?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>My goal was to eliminate as many physical pages as possible
>>>>so that they
>>>>didn't have to be maintained. In our site with over 3000
>>>>content objects,
>>>>there are less than 30 total physical pages and not a single
>>>>container.
>>>>Everything is driven dynamically by objectid & method or
>>>>metadata and then
>>>>cached.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Russell Brown"
>>>>
>>>> <russell.brown@Free To:
>>>>Spectra-Talk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>> serve.com> cc:
>>>>
>>>> Subject:
>>>>RE: Keeping Spectra?
>>>> 06/18/2002 01:19 PM
>>>>
>>>> Please respond to
>>>>
>>>> spectra-talk
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>No. All though that sounds cool.
>>>>The nature of our portal allows us to use Spectra to allow
>>editors to
>>>>create pages (with containers and objects in them) and we
>>>>then use a dead
>>>>simple script to get those pages and pass them rendered as
>>>>html to our live
>>>>cluster which serves them as flat html. So its not too good for
>>>>personalisation, but as an editorial tool it rocks.
>>>>
>>>>You have a small number of editorial users and 1 flatten
>>>>script as spectra
>>>>load and millions of users hit the result as flat html.
>>>>
>>>>Russell
>>>>
>>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>>>>Sent: 18 June 2002 18:01
>>>>To: Spectra-Talk
>>>>Subject: RE: Keeping Spectra?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Are you creating html files from your spectra objects instead
>>>>of rendering
>>>>on the fly?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Russell Brown"
>>>>
>>>> <russell.brown@Free To: Spectra-Talk
>>>><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>> serve.com> cc:
>>>>
>>>> Subject:
>>>>RE: Keeping
>>>>Spectra?
>>>> 06/18/2002 12:57 PM
>>>>
>>>> Please respond to
>>>>
>>>> spectra-talk
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Shaun,
>>>>We just serve flat renders of spectra where ever possible
>>and that has
>>>>freed us up so much. I think part of the "fun" we have had
>>>>with spectra has
>>>>been finding ways to use it and make it work.
>>>>
>>>>Russell
>>>>
>>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>>>>Sent: 18 June 2002 17:43
>>>>To: Spectra-Talk
>>>>Subject: RE: Keeping Spectra?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>With an aggressive caching strategy using cfsupercache rather
>>>>than cfcache
>>>>we've knocked out most of the performance problems.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Russell Brown"
>>>>
>>>> <russell.brown@Free To: Spectra-Talk
>>>><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>> serve.com> cc:
>>>>
>>>> Subject:
>>>>RE: Keeping
>>>>Spectra?
>>>> 06/18/2002 12:47 PM
>>>>
>>>> Please respond to
>>>>
>>>> spectra-talk
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Dave,
>>>>We still suffer a little from problems of scale and
>>>>performance but have
>>>>over come a lot and expect to overcome more with CFMX, if you
>>>>have a lot of
>>>>investment already it may be worth working around rather than
>>>>junking ?
>>>>
>>>>Russell
>>>>
>>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>>From: Dave Francis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>>>>Sent: 18 June 2002 17:48
>>>>To: Spectra-Talk
>>>>Subject: RE: Keeping Spectra?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>We are replacing Spectra, mostly due to scaling/performance problems
>>>>
>>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>>From: Tom Briscoe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>>>>Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2002 10:47 AM
>>>>To: Spectra-Talk
>>>>Subject: Keeping Spectra?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Hello all. At my company, we're giving thought to budgets
>>>>for 2003. As
>>>>you may recall, Macromedia's support for Spectra is set to
>>>>cease at the
>>>>end of that year. So I'm having to consider our future
>>plans and just
>>>>what to do with Spectra in and beyond 2003.
>>>>
>>>>I see a few immediate options:
>>>>
>>>>1) Keep Spectra - Rely on the community, consultants and my own
>>>>resources to continue to build and support applications and
>>hope it is
>>>>sustainable
>>>>
>>>>2) Replace Spectra - Invest in another "content management" product
>>>>like PaperThin's CommonSpot and hope it remains viable on the
>>>>long term
>>>>
>>>>3) Recreate Spectra - Dump all these packages and their
>>price tags in
>>>>favor of home-grown code
>>>>
>>>>I'm looking to start some discussion on this subject. But if
>>>>you don't
>>>>mind sharing, please share the list what you, your company or your
>>>>clients (names not needed) are planning to do in regard to
>>>>Spectra. Or
>>>>just chip in your two cents on the best course of action.
>>>>Anything will
>>>>do.
>>>>
>>>>Thanks!
>>>>
>>>>Tom Briscoe
>>>>Web Developer
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
______________________________________________________________________
This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for
dependable ColdFusion Hosting.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To Unsubscribe visit
http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/spectra_talk or send a
message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body.
