ColdFusion or net?

> I have been developing with CF for 2 years now, and I am very comfortable with it. I recently started with a new company and we get our software from Microsoft for free because we are not for profit. So everyone here is interested in .net and have never used CF. Now that I am here, and the only one on staff with any significant experience with data driven web based applications I want to make the case for CF, but do not know enough about .net to compare. I really do not have the time to submerse myself in a .net app right now to get some hands on so if anyone can give some pros and cons on either side I would appreciated your feedback. > > Eric

----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more ----- I think the best argument is from the perspective of labor. You already know CF well, and you'd have to relearn how to do everything in ASP.NET. Your fellow staff don't know either, and they will have to spend quite a bit more time to learn .NET than CF, in all likelihood. The cost of most software pales next to the cost of paying developers' salaries. Your organization would likely recoup the price of CFMX very quickly. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ voice: (202) 797-5496 fax: (202) 797-5444

On top of that fact, if Macromedia does not have reduced pricing for you, BlueDragon would be free as long as you don't need to deploy it on a J2EE server. ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more ----- I think the best argument is from the perspective of labor. You already know CF well, and you'd have to relearn how to do everything in ASP.NET. Your fellow staff don't know either, and they will have to spend quite a bit more time to learn .NET than CF, in all likelihood. The cost of most software pales next to the cost of paying developers' salaries. Your organization would likely recoup the price of CFMX very quickly. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ voice: (202) 797-5496 fax: (202) 797-5444

On Friday, Jun 20, 2003, at 08:07 US/Pacific, Josh Remus wrote: > On top of that fact, if Macromedia does not have reduced pricing for   > you, > BlueDragon would be free as long as you don't need to deploy it on a   > J2EE > server. And as long as you don't need: - cfexecute - cfobject - cfwddx See New Atlanta's website for more information about what is not   included in the free server edition: http://www.newatlanta.com/products/bluedragon/product_info/ cfml_tag_support.cfm You'd also want to read their compatibility guide closely... Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/ "If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive." -- Margaret Atwood

Actually I believe we qualify for their non-profit status. On top of that fact, if Macromedia does not have reduced pricing for you, BlueDragon would be free as long as you don't need to deploy it on a J2EE server. ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more ----- I think the best argument is from the perspective of labor. You already know CF well, and you'd have to relearn how to do everything in ASP.NET. Your fellow staff don't know either, and they will have to spend quite a bit more time to learn .NET than CF, in all likelihood. The cost of most software pales next to the cost of paying developers' salaries. Your organization would likely recoup the price of CFMX very quickly. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ voice: (202) 797-5496 fax: (202) 797-5444

Actually I am looking for some fair comparisons of the two products (CF and .net) to present to our group. On Friday, Jun 20, 2003, at 08:07 US/Pacific, Josh Remus wrote: > On top of that fact, if Macromedia does not have reduced pricing for   > you, > BlueDragon would be free as long as you don't need to deploy it on a   > J2EE > server. And as long as you don't need: - cfexecute - cfobject - cfwddx See New Atlanta's website for more information about what is not   included in the free server edition: http://www.newatlanta.com/products/bluedragon/product_info/ cfml_tag_support.cfm You'd also want to read their compatibility guide closely... Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/ "If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive." -- Margaret Atwood

With regard for your desire for comparisons between .NET and CFML, Eric, I'll offer something beyond Costas helpful review. Back a few weeks ago, a thread on this very subject flared up and while it blossomed into much more than just CF vs. .Net (some took it down an unfortunate path of whether CFML was dying), there were several threads that directly addressed the comparison. I wrote a note that highlighted those threads, pointing to the archive of this list for those who wanted to read them. Here they are again:   - Web Guy (http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=messages&threadid=23 837&forumid=4#119765)   - ksuh@shaw.ca (http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=messages&threadid=23 837&forumid=4#119766)   - Dave Watts (http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=messages&threadid=23 837&forumid=4#119784)   - ksuh (http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=messages&threadid=23 837&forumid=4#119789)   - doung knudsen (http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=messages&threadid=23 837&forumid=4#119791)   - Candace Cottrell (http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=messages&threadid=23 837&forumid=4#119796)   - John Paul Ashenfelter (http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=messages&threadid=23 837&forumid=4#119804)   - Mike Haggerty (http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=messages&threadid=23 837&forumid=4#119814)   - J. Kris Baca (http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=messages&threadid=23 837&forumid=4#119825)   - Dave Watts again (http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=messages&threadid=23 837&forumid=4#119830)   - John Q (http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=messages&threadid=23 837&forumid=4#119837)   - Dave W again (http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=messages&threadid=23 837&forumid=4#119841)   - "" "" (http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=messages&threadid=23 837&forumid=4#119847)   - ksuh again (http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=messages&threadid=23 837&forumid=4#119864)   - Dave W again (http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=messages&threadid=23 837&forumid=4#119914)   - Jim Davis...finally ;-} (http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=messages&threadid=23 837&forumid=4#119943)   - S Isaac Dealey (http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=messages&threadid=23 837&forumid=4#119949)   - Paul Hastings (http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=messages&threadid=23 837&forumid=4#119950)   - ksuh again (http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=messages&threadid=23 837&forumid=4#119953)   - Joe Eugene (http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=messages&threadid=23 866&forumid=4#120056)   - ksuh again (http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=messages&threadid=23 837&forumid=4#120084)   - Jim Davis again (http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=messages&threadid=23 837&forumid=4#120085) /charlie ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Eric, I have a couple more thoughts on the CF vs. .NET debate. When you bring this debate up in your user group, etc., I think it's worth pointing out again that we shouldn't really debate CF versus .NET. That's not really apples and apples. The .NET framework is more akin to the Java platform--and that means more than Java the language but the entire library of functionality (including J2EE) that both CFMX and BlueDragon are built upon. And just as the Java platform is being leveraged by thousands of organizations as an industry standard framework on which to develop (or buy) custom and resold applications, the same will be true of .NET. We CFers need to reconsider our assertions of CF vs .NET. Indeed, if I can take just one paragraph for a relevant comment on BlueDragon, our .NET is built upon the .NET framework and provides both the ability to run CFML apps on .NET as well as opportunities for native integration with that underlying platform (and ability to satisfy shops who can no longer run any CF servers, whether ColdFusion or BlueDragon Server). For more on the difference between BlueDragon Server  (and Server JX) and BlueDragon/J2EE and .NET, see http://www.newatlanta.com/products/bluedragon/. Back to the debate about CF and .NET, it may be more fair to compare CFML vs. ASP.NET. Those are more of the same type, and to be honest ASP.NET is not really the same as ASP, so a lot of the old arguments deserve at least a revisit. We all love CFML, of course, and would all agree that we can be most productive with it. But give ASP.NET a look. And--just one last relevant plug--with BlueDragon/.NET, you'll even be able to integrate your CFML apps with ASP.NET apps, much like CFMX and BlueDragon today provide that integration with JSPs and servlets. Clearly, the discussion of CF and .NET is a broader one than may seem at first, on a number of levels. /charlie ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Eric, here are some of the things I see on my travels, I hope they help (I am assuming CFMX here). ColdFusion is native operating system agnostic .NET is not.  To me and many of our clients, this is very important. It is still significantly quicker to code in ColdFusion than other web application languages. ColdFusion has an optional well developed and widely used application architecture/framework called Fusebox. (I said optional so the flaming is not too intense ;o) The core of ColdFusion is written in Java.  It is not clear as yet where this might take CF but Java is not owned by anyone .NET is. You can run ColdFusion as an application server in Java containers such as Websphere, Weblogic etc. Those are what I can think of at present, hth. Kind Regards - Mike Brunt Original Message ----------------------- Actually I am looking for some fair comparisons of the two products (CF and .net) to present to our group. On Friday, Jun 20, 2003, at 08:07 US/Pacific, Josh Remus wrote: > On top of that fact, if Macromedia does not have reduced pricing for   > you, > BlueDragon would be free as long as you don't need to deploy it on a   > J2EE > server. And as long as you don't need: - cfexecute - cfobject - cfwddx See New Atlanta's website for more information about what is not   included in the free server edition: http://www.newatlanta.com/products/bluedragon/product_info/ cfml_tag_support.cfm You'd also want to read their compatibility guide closely... Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/ "If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive." -- Margaret Atwood

Mike, While it's true that Java is not owned by anyone it does suffer from institutional infighting and proprietary vendor issues.  I'm a little tepid on that item.  I agree with everything else however. -mk Eric, here are some of the things I see on my travels, I hope they help (I am assuming CFMX here). ColdFusion is native operating system agnostic .NET is not.  To me and many of our clients, this is very important. It is still significantly quicker to code in ColdFusion than other web application languages. ColdFusion has an optional well developed and widely used application architecture/framework called Fusebox. (I said optional so the flaming is not too intense ;o) The core of ColdFusion is written in Java.  It is not clear as yet where this might take CF but Java is not owned by anyone .NET is. You can run ColdFusion as an application server in Java containers such as Websphere, Weblogic etc. Those are what I can think of at present, hth. Kind Regards - Mike Brunt Original Message ----------------------- Actually I am looking for some fair comparisons of the two products (CF and .net) to present to our group. On Friday, Jun 20, 2003, at 08:07 US/Pacific, Josh Remus wrote: > On top of that fact, if Macromedia does not have reduced pricing for > you, > BlueDragon would be free as long as you don't need to deploy it on a > J2EE > server. And as long as you don't need: - cfexecute - cfobject - cfwddx See New Atlanta's website for more information about what is not included in the free server edition: http://www.newatlanta.com/products/bluedragon/product_info/ cfml_tag_support.cfm You'd also want to read their compatibility guide closely... Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/ "If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive." -- Margaret Atwood

In general, .net provides you with a whole new way of thinking about writing web apps.  Lots of xml integration, very object oriented, tonnes of different language support: C#, vb.net, delhpi, etc etc...  Forget everything you learned about writing a web app in ColdFusion.  Dot Net is a whole new game.  It's more like writing a VB app than a web app really. You have to think in terms of UML, object creation, components, and the like, rather than spaghetti code like in ASP, PHP, or CF.  In fact, dot net tries to seperacte code from presentation.  They have this feature called code-behind where all your code is in a separate vb file. CFML is more like spaghetti code, it's just nicer looking and easier for the naked eye to read.  CF has better platform support.  It'll run in Window$ or Linux, or a bunch of *nix flavours or on OSX server...  With bluedragon, it'll run on any J2EE compliant platform like Websphere, BEA Weblogic, etc. Both platforms pre-compile.  Performance differences are neglidgable really. The biggest performance drain on any web app is the database time anyway. We're talking about milliseconds of differences between the platforms. There's some drawbacks to dot net.  Things that took a few minutes in cf are a royal pain in dot net.  For example.  Let's say you are using the data grid object to output a recordset, and you wanted to add category headings so that you'd have output like this: Group1 Field 1  Field2  Field3 Field 1  Field2  Field3 Field 1  Field2  Field3 Group 2 Field 1  Field2  Field3 Field 1  Field2  Field3 Field 1  Field2  Field3 In asp.net, this is a royal pain.  Took us a few months before we found out how, and it wasn't pretty.  You can do this in a few minutes in cfmx using the <cfoutput group ="..."> tag. CFMX is great for Rapid Development.  Sometimes, time to market is crucial to the success of a web app.  Ebay is one of the many countless examples of first-past-the-post theory.  How many other auction sites were out there that failed? However, if programming in an n-tier enviroment, COM / CORBA integration is important to your app, then CFMX can get tricky.  COM support in ColdFusion has always blown goats.  It just doesn't work well for anything complicated. Too many things you can't do.  You have to get into writing cfx tags if you want that kind of support.   If you bill by the hour, dot net is the platform you want.  You'll get paid for a much longer project than with a CFMX project :) Actually I am looking for some fair comparisons of the two products (CF and .net) to present to our group. On Friday, Jun 20, 2003, at 08:07 US/Pacific, Josh Remus wrote: > On top of that fact, if Macromedia does not have reduced pricing for > you, > BlueDragon would be free as long as you don't need to deploy it on a   > J2EE > server. And as long as you don't need: - cfexecute - cfobject - cfwddx See New Atlanta's website for more information about what is not   included in the free server edition: http://www.newatlanta.com/products/bluedragon/product_info/ cfml_tag_support.cfm You'd also want to read their compatibility guide closely... Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/ "If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive." -- Margaret Atwood

On Friday, Jun 20, 2003, at 12:06 US/Pacific, Costas Piliotis wrote: > CFML is more like spaghetti code It's only spaghetti code if you write it that way. You can write nice structured code in CF. ColdFusion MX allows you to write OO-style code and frameworks like Fusebox allow for good separation of logic and presentation - especially in the forthcoming Fusebox MX framework which provides MVC out-of-the-box. > CF has better platform support.  It'll run in Window$ or > Linux, or a bunch of *nix flavours or on OSX server...  With > bluedragon, > it'll run on any J2EE compliant platform like Websphere, BEA Weblogic, > etc. Well, BlueDragon is not "Java Verified" so you can't make that statement with certainty. ColdFusion MX on the other hand is "Java Verified". I run CFMX for J2EE on Tomcat and JRun locally. > CFMX is great for Rapid Development.  Sometimes, time to market is > crucial > to the success of a web app. And sometimes you'll need to move your application across different platforms - something .NET does not allow (Project Mono is an interesting experiment that may or may not provide a realistic way to deliver 'cross-platform' .NET applications). > COM support in ColdFusion has always blown goats.  It just doesn't > work well for anything complicated. And, of course, COM is being sidelined by Microsoft as they push all their developers onto the new platform (.NET) and everyone has to rewrite their old ASP and VB apps (and everyone will have to do it all over again when Microsoft rolls out their next new platform :) Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/ "If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive." -- Margaret Atwood

"You can run ColdFusion as an application server" I meant application service. Original Message ----------------------- Eric, here are some of the things I see on my travels, I hope they help (I am assuming CFMX here). ColdFusion is native operating system agnostic .NET is not.  To me and many of our clients, this is very important. It is still significantly quicker to code in ColdFusion than other web application languages. ColdFusion has an optional well developed and widely used application architecture/framework called Fusebox. (I said optional so the flaming is not too intense ;o) The core of ColdFusion is written in Java.  It is not clear as yet where this might take CF but Java is not owned by anyone .NET is. You can run ColdFusion as an application server in Java containers such as Websphere, Weblogic etc. Those are what I can think of at present, hth. Kind Regards - Mike Brunt Original Message ----------------------- Actually I am looking for some fair comparisons of the two products (CF and .net) to present to our group. On Friday, Jun 20, 2003, at 08:07 US/Pacific, Josh Remus wrote: > On top of that fact, if Macromedia does not have reduced pricing for   > you, > BlueDragon would be free as long as you don't need to deploy it on a   > J2EE > server. And as long as you don't need: - cfexecute - cfobject - cfwddx See New Atlanta's website for more information about what is not   included in the free server edition: http://www.newatlanta.com/products/bluedragon/product_info/ cfml_tag_support.cfm You'd also want to read their compatibility guide closely... Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/ "If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive." -- Margaret Atwood

Java is owned by Sun Microsystems Incorporated.  There is a community process in place that recommends changes to Java, but the final authority rests with Sun. ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Original Message ----------------------- Java is owned by Sun Microsystems Incorporated.  There is a community process in place that recommends changes to Java, but the final authority rests with Sun. ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Good points but there is still a huge difference between the ownership implications of .NET and Java IMHO. Kind Regards - Mike Brunt Original Message ----------------------- Java is owned by Sun Microsystems Incorporated.  There is a community process in place that recommends changes to Java, but the final authority rests with Sun. ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

You are correct - however, it is often more than compensated by the total cost of building, maintaining and supporting - MS technology is often simply cheaper over all - regardless of the good feelings that come from java enlightenment.  IMO bottom liners don't give vendor lock the credence that developers seem to think they do. -mk Good points but there is still a huge difference between the ownership implications of .NET and Java IMHO. Kind Regards - Mike Brunt Original Message ----------------------- Java is owned by Sun Microsystems Incorporated.  There is a community process in place that recommends changes to Java, but the final authority rests with Sun. ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----