Home of the ColdFusion Community
|
Mailing Lists
|
Home /
Groups /
ColdFusion Talk (CF-Talk)
Adobe Nails ColdFusion Cofin
Author: Tom Chiverton
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#285453
On Friday 03 Aug 2007, mason@fusionlink.com wrote:
> flash remoting  just use WebORB if you have BD
Last time I looked, WebORB was the same price again as BD.
--
Tom Chiverton
****************************************************
This email is sent for and on behalf of Halliwells LLP.
Halliwells LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in England and Wales
under registered number OC307980 whose registered office address is at St James's
Court Brown Street Manchester M2 2JF. A list of members is available for
inspection at the registered office. Any reference to a partner in relation to
Halliwells LLP means a member of Halliwells LLP. Regulated by the Law Society.
CONFIDENTIALITY
This email is intended only for the use of the addressee named above and may be
confidential or legally privileged. If you are not the addressee you must not
read it and must not use any information contained in nor copy it nor inform any
person other than Halliwells LLP or the addressee of its existence or contents.
If you have received this email in error please delete it and notify Halliwells
LLP IT Department on 0870 365 8008.
For more information about Halliwells LLP visit www.halliwells.com.
Author: Dinner
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#285400
> BINGO!
BS!
ROI is about rationalizations, man.
One man's Good ROI is, another man's Bad ROI.
I keep hearing this talk like ROI is some easy bit of logic, and I'm like,
where have you guys been- mars?
There is a difference between Investing, and Saving- id est, risk!
This is all subjective and whatnot, is what I'm trying to get across,
and I'm surprised that there (well, not really surprised) are people
who don't get it.
Buzz-word-itis, neh? Bah! C#? Isn't that the one that's sorta a bite
off of Java? Why would you do that to yourself, dude? ;-)
Talk about vendor lock in, or whatever, right? :-P
__
Freaking addicst... heh
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Kevin Aebig
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#285385
BINGO!
The large project I was thinking of doing on CF just went to C#...
!k
Rick...
You make compelling arguments. But IMO, if you have to explain the ROI to
someone, then you've already lost the battle. There might be a few people
that would be convinced by your (compelling) arguments. But most people are
going to see that price tag and not even BOTHER reading the rest of the
stuff about it.
They'll simply think "CF is too much for my budget" and go install PHP or
something.
andy
>
> To be honest, the difference between $3,000/CPU and $3,750/CPU is
> pretty negligible in an enterprise world.
I would agree here. The cost of the server is pretty minor compared to the
cost of everything else that goes into building an enterprise environment.
Especially when you consider the following:
#1 - Coldfusion Enterprise includes a LOT of things that you'd probably have
to pay extra for in other environments.
#2 - It's a LOT easier to develop advanced applications in Coldfusion versus
OTHER environments (IMO, obviously)
As a developer working 40 hours a week at a certain "hourly" rate...
if I'm even 10% more productive working on Coldfusion versus another
environment, that alone makes the COST of Coldfusion worthwhile.
Let's say the cost of my employment, including benefits, is about $50/hour.
The 10% productivity increase would amount to 208 hours, or an additional
$10,000 in work completed in a typical 2080 hour work year.
Assuming the life of a Coldfusion 8 license is only 2 years and you're not
buying a subscription... that's over $20,000 in savings.. just by using
Coldfusion because you can be more productive on it.
Author: Dinner
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#285361
> Most companies that are using enterprise level products will not use the
> free versions of linux because there is no support for them. Ey need to
> have someone to call and be able to fix ASAP if something breaks. That
> would require one of the paid versions of linux that has a support plan,
> like RHE.
That's besides the real point we're getting at though.
You don't /have/ to buy RH, to run RH (legally). You could hire a work-
study for pennies on the dollar, and get better support than that which
comes with a Support Subscription (I've found this to be true with every
product we've bought support for, BTW).
Replace work-study with "poor computer dude", if applicable.
That is the difference, and it might be the difference that makes the
techs that offer that advantage overtake those that don't.
All that said, for all I know, this philosophy makes slaves of us all, or
something like that- in the end. It sure seems nice from here, tho. =]
Author: John Mason
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#285357
I was kind of hoping this thread would died. But oh well...
I'm sure the NewAtlanta guys will have a better response, but in the
meantime..
The features you mention in view of BD...
Cfreport - not very good in CF7 (I'm surprise your currently using it). CF8
is better. Sql Server 2005 also has a reporting feature. And of course
there's crystal reports but a lot of people seem to love or hate that one.
flash remoting - just use WebORB if you have BD
Cfexchange - you have .NET in the background, which has more access to AD
and Exchange right out of the box than the CF8 tags
John Mason
mason@fusionlink.com
770.337.8363
www.FusionLink.com - ColdFusion and Flex hosting
Now offering ColdFusion 8 Enterprise hosting
FREE Subversion hosting
While I started this thread.
I would not recommend anyone move to Blue Dragon to save money. There is not
that much price difference at the enterprise level, you don't have the Adobe
brand and support behind you and most importantly you don't have all the
features.
We use
Cfreport, flash remoting, cfexchange and will use the new image, zip and
lots of the ajax stuff which BD doesn't have. I actually think cfreport is
one of the great unsung features of CF and with CFPRINT it gets a bit
better. Imagine E-Commmerce online store, where whenever an order is placed
you get an invoice or dispatch document automatically spit out on someone's
printer, how cool is that.
I'm not even sure how BD have a market, there is probably merit to offering
a free version for non commercial use and hooking you in, this is really not
much difference than developer edition (without the water marks). But it's a
different mindset perhaps.
For me to consider BD it would seriously need to be half the price or less.
Regards
Dale Fraser
http://dalefraser.blogspot.com
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
We don't use flash remoting, cfreport, flash forms, cfexchange or
cfpresentation. The gateways may be a problem (given a couple of projects
involving real-time data collection from a couple of DNA/PCR analysis
robots) but a possible work around may be using JMS. For most of what CF8
offers, Blue Dragon offers the same, and where it doesn't, there are open
source java projects that we can integrate with our apps if we need that
functionality.
Essentially it was not a decision I was involved in (being just a peon when
it comes to the bean counting stuff), but I can see the rationale used by
the PHB's. The decision was about making a leap from cfmx 6.1 to either BD7
or cfmx8. The costs for upgrading from our current setup to BlueDragon7 plus
a 2 year subscription was less than half the cost to upgrade 10+ servers to
CFMX8 with no subscriptions at all.
Moreover in terms of compatibility, I've had to change nothing so far to
accommodate the switch, and deploying to JBoss is much easier than jrun.
Author: Dale Fraser
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#285343
While I started this thread.
I would not recommend anyone move to Blue Dragon to save money. There is not
that much price difference at the enterprise level, you don't have the Adobe
brand and support behind you and most importantly you don't have all the
features.
We use
Cfreport, flash remoting, cfexchange and will use the new image, zip and
lots of the ajax stuff which BD doesn't have. I actually think cfreport is
one of the great unsung features of CF and with CFPRINT it gets a bit
better. Imagine E-Commmerce online store, where whenever an order is placed
you get an invoice or dispatch document automatically spit out on someone's
printer, how cool is that.
I'm not even sure how BD have a market, there is probably merit to offering
a free version for non commercial use and hooking you in, this is really not
much difference than developer edition (without the water marks). But it's a
different mindset perhaps.
For me to consider BD it would seriously need to be half the price or less.
Regards
Dale Fraser
http://dalefraser.blogspot.com
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
We don't use flash remoting, cfreport, flash forms, cfexchange or
cfpresentation. The gateways may be a problem (given a couple of projects
involving real-time data collection from a couple of DNA/PCR analysis
robots) but a possible work around may be using JMS. For most of what CF8
offers, Blue Dragon offers the same, and where it doesn't, there are open
source java projects that we can integrate with our apps if we need that
functionality.
Essentially it was not a decision I was involved in (being just a peon when
it comes to the bean counting stuff), but I can see the rationale used by
the PHB's. The decision was about making a leap from cfmx 6.1 to either BD7
or cfmx8. The costs for upgrading from our current setup to BlueDragon7 plus
a 2 year subscription was less than half the cost to upgrade 10+ servers to
CFMX8 with no subscriptions at all.
Moreover in terms of compatibility, I've had to change nothing so far to
accommodate the switch, and deploying to JBoss is much easier than jrun.
Author: Larry Lyons
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#285324
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
We don't use flash remoting, cfreport, flash forms, cfexchange or cfpresentation.
The gateways may be a problem (given a couple of projects involving real-time
data collection from a couple of DNA/PCR analysis robots) but a possible work
around may be using JMS. For most of what CF8 offers, Blue Dragon offers the
same, and where it doesn't, there are open source java projects that we can
integrate with our apps if we need that functionality.
Essentially it was not a decision I was involved in (being just a peon when it
comes to the bean counting stuff), but I can see the rationale used by the PHB's.
The decision was about making a leap from cfmx 6.1 to either BD7 or cfmx8. The
costs for upgrading from our current setup to BlueDragon7 plus a 2 year
subscription was less than half the cost to upgrade 10+ servers to CFMX8 with no
subscriptions at all.
Moreover in terms of compatibility, I've had to change nothing so far to
accommodate the switch, and deploying to JBoss is much easier than jrun.
Author: Eric Roberts
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#285322
Most companies that are using enterprise level products will not use the
free versions of linux because there is no support for them. Ey need to
have someone to call and be able to fix ASAP if something breaks. That
would require one of the paid versions of linux that has a support plan,
like RHE.
Eric
Use Debian! :)
How...you are paying license fees for those OS's. If you want the stable
version of Red Hat Linux...you have to buy RHE. Fedora is the bleeding edge
and thus non-stable version that is used as a test platform.
Eric
Author: Tom Chiverton
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#285284
On Friday 03 Aug 2007, owner@threeravensconsulting.com wrote:
> That's too much work hehehe :ÂD Plus time is also money, so even if I go
> that route, it is not free.
<shrug>
It's not like you have to build it yourself, CentOS have ISOs and what have
you too ya know :-)
--
Tom Chiverton
****************************************************
This email is sent for and on behalf of Halliwells LLP.
Halliwells LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in England and Wales
under registered number OC307980 whose registered office address is at St James's
Court Brown Street Manchester M2 2JF. A list of members is available for
inspection at the registered office. Any reference to a partner in relation to
Halliwells LLP means a member of Halliwells LLP. Regulated by the Law Society.
CONFIDENTIALITY
This email is intended only for the use of the addressee named above and may be
confidential or legally privileged. If you are not the addressee you must not
read it and must not use any information contained in nor copy it nor inform any
person other than Halliwells LLP or the addressee of its existence or contents.
If you have received this email in error please delete it and notify Halliwells
LLP IT Department on 0870 365 8008.
For more information about Halliwells LLP visit www.halliwells.com.
Author: Tom Chiverton
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#285283
On Thursday 02 Aug 2007, owner@threeravensconsulting.com wrote:
> Fedora is the bleeding
> edge and thus nonÂstable version that is used as a test platform.
This is a gross missrepresentation. Fedora Core is perfectly stable and usable
in production.
What it is not is *supported* - if anything goes wrong with CF you can't phone
Adobe till you've rebased to RHE.
--
Tom Chiverton
****************************************************
This email is sent for and on behalf of Halliwells LLP.
Halliwells LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in England and Wales
under registered number OC307980 whose registered office address is at St James's
Court Brown Street Manchester M2 2JF. A list of members is available for
inspection at the registered office. Any reference to a partner in relation to
Halliwells LLP means a member of Halliwells LLP. Regulated by the Law Society.
CONFIDENTIALITY
This email is intended only for the use of the addressee named above and may be
confidential or legally privileged. If you are not the addressee you must not
read it and must not use any information contained in nor copy it nor inform any
person other than Halliwells LLP or the addressee of its existence or contents.
If you have received this email in error please delete it and notify Halliwells
LLP IT Department on 0870 365 8008.
For more information about Halliwells LLP visit www.halliwells.com.
Author: Tom Chiverton
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#285282
On Thursday 02 Aug 2007, Oblio.Leitch@ahs.state.vt.us wrote:
> Yes, we were able to. It was something like $520 for two years.
So, even if you had to pay twice to get CF7 and CF8, that's still cheaper than
buying it outright.
--
Tom Chiverton
****************************************************
This email is sent for and on behalf of Halliwells LLP.
Halliwells LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in England and Wales
under registered number OC307980 whose registered office address is at St James's
Court Brown Street Manchester M2 2JF. A list of members is available for
inspection at the registered office. Any reference to a partner in relation to
Halliwells LLP means a member of Halliwells LLP. Regulated by the Law Society.
CONFIDENTIALITY
This email is intended only for the use of the addressee named above and may be
confidential or legally privileged. If you are not the addressee you must not
read it and must not use any information contained in nor copy it nor inform any
person other than Halliwells LLP or the addressee of its existence or contents.
If you have received this email in error please delete it and notify Halliwells
LLP IT Department on 0870 365 8008.
For more information about Halliwells LLP visit www.halliwells.com.
Author: Eric Roberts
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#285267
That's too much work hehehe :-D Plus time is also money, so even if I go
that route, it is not free.
Eric
> I did look into getting RHE at one point for my dev server since
> that was the supported version. You cannot just download a copy of RHE
> without the support package.
>
Of course, you could download the sources for RHEL and build it
yourself, which is what the CentOS and White Box distros do. The
license that you are paying to Redhat is really for access to the RHN
and response time on any issues you have.
Author: O?uz_Demirkap?
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#285257
Use Debian! :)
How...you are paying license fees for those OS's. If you want the stable
version of Red Hat Linux...you have to buy RHE. Fedora is the bleeding edge
and thus non-stable version that is used as a test platform.
Eric
Author: DURETTE, STEVEN J (ATTASIAIT)
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#285247
You are correct, I just did it a little while ago (about March). Saved
a bundle!
Steve
But, you can renew a subscription, correct? I was with the
understanding that you make the first initial purchase of CF, then you
can choose to purchase CF subscriptions for as long as you need.
For example, before your two-year subscription expires, I thought you
could renew that subscription without having to pay the full price
again.
Please correct me if I'm wrong.
M!ke
No it doesn't.
It says 12 months or 24 months, so it's a bit of pot luck. Although 8
releases in 12 years, the odds for a release in 2 years are good. This
might be the first one that was more than 2 years not sure.
Regards
Dale Fraser
http://dalefraser.blogspot.com
Author: Jim Wright
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#285218
> I did look into getting RHE at one point for my dev server since
> that was the supported version. You cannot just download a copy of RHE
> without the support package.
>
Of course, you could download the sources for RHEL and build it
yourself, which is what the CentOS and White Box distros do. The
license that you are paying to Redhat is really for access to the RHN
and response time on any issues you have.
Author: Eric Roberts
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#285203
Fedora and RHE are 2 different critters. So if you want RHE...you have to
pay for it. I cannot comment on JBOSS as I an mot familiar with how they
charge. I did look into getting RHE at one point for my dev server since
that was the supported version. You cannot just download a copy of RHE
without the support package.
Eric
Bump. j/k =]
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
that's
> > kind of like what I'm talking about.
>
> I don't remember pricing up RHEL under maintenance but here's
> something I did look at:
Yeah, I get the whole 6 of one argument, but I was thinking more
along the lines of: you don't /have/ to pay for support. I don't think
jboss or redhat restrict what's available to the general public. ( I
don't know really, it's been a while since I used stuff besides fedora
or centOS or whatnot. SuSE, at least when we were paying for it,
was selling support, not the OS itself- & we payed from the heart ;)
I like the idea of four dudes throwing a bunch of cheap hardware
together and creating some cool thing- why not make it easy to
make things better for everyone? Give those heads who have
only gumption and know-how a freaking chance- a niche, if you
will.
Of course it's really a dozen of this or a dozen of that in the
end- but one's a baker's dozen! =-P
__
I don't mean to come across like I know what I'm talking about,
there could be huge factors I'm not considering, etc..
Like I've said before- it's fun to watch it all unfold =]
PS- you still gotta pay for that hardware somehow, and traffic,
so no matter what, "it" costs. Perhaps in the long view there is
not as much difference as one would think. Eh.** Back to CF!
Author: Eric Roberts
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#285195
How...you are paying license fees for those OS's. If you want the stable
version of Red Hat Linux...you have to buy RHE. Fedora is the bleeding edge
and thus non-stable version that is used as a test platform.
Eric
Quite different from paying license fees tho, isn't that? In fact, that's
kind of like what I'm talking about.
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Leitch, Oblio
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#285181
Yes, we were able to. It was something like $520 for two years.
But, you can renew a subscription, correct? I was with the
understanding that you make the first initial purchase of CF, then you
can choose to purchase CF subscriptions for as long as you need.
For example, before your two-year subscription expires, I thought you
could renew that subscription without having to pay the full price
again.
Please correct me if I'm wrong.
M!ke
This email message may contain privileged and/or confidential information. If you
are not the intended recipient(s), you are hereby notified that any
dissemination, distribution, or copying of this email message is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please immediately notify
the sender and delete this email message from your computer.
CAUTION: The Agency of Human Services cannot ensure the confidentiality or
security of email
transmissions.
Author: Jochem van Dieten
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#285180
Ben Forta wrote:
> I know I am going to regret saying this, but what the heck ...
>
> Regardless of how anyone feels about the price change, just know that this
> decision was NOT made in a vacuum. In fact, the team polled lots of
> ColdFusion customers to ask them their opinion on this. And the general
> feedback, even from those who would rather we not charge more, was that the
> price change was fair and not inappropriate.
I am very happy with the new price point of ColdFusion and especially with the
fact that European customers are now paying prices that are on par with US
prices.
Jochem
Author: Dawson, Michael
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#285177
But, you can renew a subscription, correct? I was with the
understanding that you make the first initial purchase of CF, then you
can choose to purchase CF subscriptions for as long as you need.
For example, before your two-year subscription expires, I thought you
could renew that subscription without having to pay the full price
again.
Please correct me if I'm wrong.
M!ke
No it doesn't.
It says 12 months or 24 months, so it's a bit of pot luck. Although 8
releases in 12 years, the odds for a release in 2 years are good. This
might be the first one that was more than 2 years not sure.
Regards
Dale Fraser
http://dalefraser.blogspot.com
Author: Tom Chiverton
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#285171
On Thursday 02 Aug 2007, dale@fraser.id.au wrote:
> releases in 12 years, the odds for a release in 2 years are good. This
> might be the first one that was more than 2 years not sure.
And was probably delayed because Macromedia got bought mid-way in the CF8
cycle.
--
Tom Chiverton
****************************************************
This email is sent for and on behalf of Halliwells LLP.
Halliwells LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in England and Wales
under registered number OC307980 whose registered office address is at St James's
Court Brown Street Manchester M2 2JF. A list of members is available for
inspection at the registered office. Any reference to a partner in relation to
Halliwells LLP means a member of Halliwells LLP. Regulated by the Law Society.
CONFIDENTIALITY
This email is intended only for the use of the addressee named above and may be
confidential or legally privileged. If you are not the addressee you must not
read it and must not use any information contained in nor copy it nor inform any
person other than Halliwells LLP or the addressee of its existence or contents.
If you have received this email in error please delete it and notify Halliwells
LLP IT Department on 0870 365 8008.
For more information about Halliwells LLP visit www.halliwells.com.
Author: Dale Fraser
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#285167
No it doesn't.
It says 12 months or 24 months, so it's a bit of pot luck. Although 8
releases in 12 years, the odds for a release in 2 years are good. This might
be the first one that was more than 2 years not sure.
Regards
Dale Fraser
http://dalefraser.blogspot.com
The idea of subs with all products is to make the upgrading cheaper, thus
you keep the subs going your ensure your upgrade path is cheaper, I would
suggest if you have subs and no free upgrade this time discuss with Adobe,
as I'm sure it says One Major Release in that time.
How So?
A Sub is for 24 months, which means you get free updates for 2 years. There
hasn't been an upgrade for more than 2 years, which means you got nothing
for your sub $ if you purchased CF7 + Sub when it got released.
Regards
Dale Fraser
http://dalefraser.blogspot.com
On Thursday 02 Aug 2007, dale@fraser.id.au wrote:
> > Well, you should have bought maintenance then, shouldn't you? :)
> Wrong, CF7 came out more than 2 years ago so everyone who bought a
> subscription with CF7 release wasted their money.
How so ?
--
Tom Chiverton
****************************************************
This email is sent for and on behalf of Halliwells LLP.
Halliwells LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in England and
Wales under registered number OC307980 whose registered office address is at
St James's Court Brown Street Manchester M2 2JF. A list of members is
available for inspection at the registered office. Any reference to a
partner in relation to Halliwells LLP means a member of Halliwells LLP.
Regulated by the Law Society.
CONFIDENTIALITY
This email is intended only for the use of the addressee named above and may
be confidential or legally privileged. If you are not the addressee you
must not read it and must not use any information contained in nor copy it
nor inform any person other than Halliwells LLP or the addressee of its
existence or contents. If you have received this email in error please
delete it and notify Halliwells LLP IT Department on 0870 365 8008.
For more information about Halliwells LLP visit www.halliwells.com.
Author: Big Mad Kev
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#285165
The idea of subs with all products is to make the upgrading cheaper, thus
you keep the subs going your ensure your upgrade path is cheaper, I would
suggest if you have subs and no free upgrade this time discuss with Adobe,
as I'm sure it says One Major Release in that time.
How So?
A Sub is for 24 months, which means you get free updates for 2 years. There
hasn't been an upgrade for more than 2 years, which means you got nothing
for your sub $ if you purchased CF7 + Sub when it got released.
Regards
Dale Fraser
http://dalefraser.blogspot.com
On Thursday 02 Aug 2007, dale@fraser.id.au wrote:
> > Well, you should have bought maintenance then, shouldn't you? :)
> Wrong, CF7 came out more than 2 years ago so everyone who bought a
> subscription with CF7 release wasted their money.
How so ?
--
Tom Chiverton
****************************************************
This email is sent for and on behalf of Halliwells LLP.
Halliwells LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in England and
Wales under registered number OC307980 whose registered office address is at
St James's Court Brown Street Manchester M2 2JF. A list of members is
available for inspection at the registered office. Any reference to a
partner in relation to Halliwells LLP means a member of Halliwells LLP.
Regulated by the Law Society.
CONFIDENTIALITY
This email is intended only for the use of the addressee named above and may
be confidential or legally privileged. If you are not the addressee you
must not read it and must not use any information contained in nor copy it
nor inform any person other than Halliwells LLP or the addressee of its
existence or contents. If you have received this email in error please
delete it and notify Halliwells LLP IT Department on 0870 365 8008.
For more information about Halliwells LLP visit www.halliwells.com.
Author: Dale Fraser
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#285162
How So?
A Sub is for 24 months, which means you get free updates for 2 years. There
hasn't been an upgrade for more than 2 years, which means you got nothing
for your sub $ if you purchased CF7 + Sub when it got released.
Regards
Dale Fraser
http://dalefraser.blogspot.com
On Thursday 02 Aug 2007, dale@fraser.id.au wrote:
> > Well, you should have bought maintenance then, shouldn't you? :)
> Wrong, CF7 came out more than 2 years ago so everyone who bought a
> subscription with CF7 release wasted their money.
How so ?
--
Tom Chiverton
****************************************************
This email is sent for and on behalf of Halliwells LLP.
Halliwells LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in England and
Wales under registered number OC307980 whose registered office address is at
St James's Court Brown Street Manchester M2 2JF. A list of members is
available for inspection at the registered office. Any reference to a
partner in relation to Halliwells LLP means a member of Halliwells LLP.
Regulated by the Law Society.
CONFIDENTIALITY
This email is intended only for the use of the addressee named above and may
be confidential or legally privileged. If you are not the addressee you
must not read it and must not use any information contained in nor copy it
nor inform any person other than Halliwells LLP or the addressee of its
existence or contents. If you have received this email in error please
delete it and notify Halliwells LLP IT Department on 0870 365 8008.
For more information about Halliwells LLP visit www.halliwells.com.
Author: Andy Allan
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#285161
Exactly ... subscriptions are good.
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Tom Chiverton
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#285160
On Thursday 02 Aug 2007, andy.allan@gmail.com wrote:
> If you bought 7 then, with the two year subscription, then that
> subscription had expired before 8 was released so you got no benefit.
Except the sub. gets you support, and you'll probably have renewed, so you'll
get CF9 for free :-)
--
Tom Chiverton
****************************************************
This email is sent for and on behalf of Halliwells LLP.
Halliwells LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in England and Wales
under registered number OC307980 whose registered office address is at St James's
Court Brown Street Manchester M2 2JF. A list of members is available for
inspection at the registered office. Any reference to a partner in relation to
Halliwells LLP means a member of Halliwells LLP. Regulated by the Law Society.
CONFIDENTIALITY
This email is intended only for the use of the addressee named above and may be
confidential or legally privileged. If you are not the addressee you must not
read it and must not use any information contained in nor copy it nor inform any
person other than Halliwells LLP or the addressee of its existence or contents.
If you have received this email in error please delete it and notify Halliwells
LLP IT Department on 0870 365 8008.
For more information about Halliwells LLP visit www.halliwells.com.
Author: Big Mad Kev
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#285159
If I remember correctly the Subs said one Major Upgrade (well they did for 6
upto 7) So you may have a case there? But you should always renew your subs
its always cheaper.
ColdFusion 7 came out in February 2005.
If you bought 7 then, with the two year subscription, then that
subscription had expired before 8 was released so you got no benefit.
If you happened to buy ColdFusion 7 from August 2005 onwards, woo hoo.
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
and Wales under registered number OC307980 whose registered office address
is at St James's Court Brown Street Manchester M2 2JF. A list of members is
available for inspection at the registered office. Any reference to a
partner in relation to Halliwells LLP means a member of Halliwells LLP.
Regulated by the Law Society.
>
> CONFIDENTIALITY
>
> This email is intended only for the use of the addressee named above and
may be confidential or legally privileged. If you are not the addressee you
must not read it and must not use any information contained in nor copy it
nor inform any person other than Halliwells LLP or the addressee of its
existence or contents. If you have received this email in error please
delete it and notify Halliwells LLP IT Department on 0870 365 8008.
>
> For more information about Halliwells LLP visit www.halliwells.com.
>
>
>
Author: Andy Allan
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#285155
ColdFusion 7 came out in February 2005.
If you bought 7 then, with the two year subscription, then that
subscription had expired before 8 was released so you got no benefit.
If you happened to buy ColdFusion 7 from August 2005 onwards, woo hoo.
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Tom Chiverton
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#285153
On Thursday 02 Aug 2007, dale@fraser.id.au wrote:
> > Well, you should have bought maintenance then, shouldn't you? :)
> Wrong, CF7 came out more than 2 years ago so everyone who bought a
> subscription with CF7 release wasted their money.
How so ?
--
Tom Chiverton
****************************************************
This email is sent for and on behalf of Halliwells LLP.
Halliwells LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in England and Wales
under registered number OC307980 whose registered office address is at St James's
Court Brown Street Manchester M2 2JF. A list of members is available for
inspection at the registered office. Any reference to a partner in relation to
Halliwells LLP means a member of Halliwells LLP. Regulated by the Law Society.
CONFIDENTIALITY
This email is intended only for the use of the addressee named above and may be
confidential or legally privileged. If you are not the addressee you must not
read it and must not use any information contained in nor copy it nor inform any
person other than Halliwells LLP or the addressee of its existence or contents.
If you have received this email in error please delete it and notify Halliwells
LLP IT Department on 0870 365 8008.
For more information about Halliwells LLP visit www.halliwells.com.
Author: Dinner
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#285144
Bump. j/k =]
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Yeah, I get the whole 6 of one argument, but I was thinking more
along the lines of: you don't /have/ to pay for support. I don't think
jboss or redhat restrict what's available to the general public. ( I
don't know really, it's been a while since I used stuff besides fedora
or centOS or whatnot. SuSE, at least when we were paying for it,
was selling support, not the OS itself- & we payed from the heart ;)
I like the idea of four dudes throwing a bunch of cheap hardware
together and creating some cool thing- why not make it easy to
make things better for everyone? Give those heads who have
only gumption and know-how a freaking chance- a niche, if you
will.
Of course it's really a dozen of this or a dozen of that in the
end- but one's a baker's dozen! =-P
__
I don't mean to come across like I know what I'm talking about,
there could be huge factors I'm not considering, etc..
Like I've said before- it's fun to watch it all unfold =]
PS- you still gotta pay for that hardware somehow, and traffic,
so no matter what, "it" costs. Perhaps in the long view there is
not as much difference as one would think. Eh.** Back to CF!
Author: James Holmes
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#285131
You could throw in $799 per server per year for a SLES standard subscription:
http://www.novell.com/products/server/howtobuy.html
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
--
mxAjax / CFAjax docs and other useful articles:
http://www.bifrost.com.au/blog/
Author: Sean Corfield
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#285125
> Quite different from paying license fees tho, isn't that? In fact, that's
> kind of like what I'm talking about.
>
> > Well, sort of. Enterprises often use SLES, RHEL; versions of Linux
> > that are not free.
I don't remember pricing up RHEL under maintenance but here's
something I did look at:
JBoss support / maintenance can very quickly reach $100k / year for
even a moderate server farm (for the app server, Hibernate, clustering
etc - all of which JBoss prices separately). Comparable with annual
support for WebLogic (or WebSphere no doubt - but I only did a direct
comparison of JBoss and WebLogic). The difference in costs between
WebLogic and JBoss came down the initial license fee (about $400k for
the setup I was evaluating). ColdFusion 8 Enterprise would be $120k in
the context of that (a 32 CPU farm) which actually makes CF8 "cheap"
compared to JBoss (assuming you actually pay the support fees) and
very cheap compared to WebLogic.
Just a price point for a relatively small "enterprise" project.
--
Sean A Corfield -- (904) 302-SEAN
An Architect's View -- http://corfield.org/
"If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive."
-- Margaret Atwood
Author: Dinner
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#285117
Quite different from paying license fees tho, isn't that? In fact, that's
kind of like what I'm talking about.
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Dinner
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#285116
> I also have to say that Groovy and Grails are awesome as well...
>
> We use both here, and I am impressed.
Heh. Yeah. I keep saying PHP and whatnot, but those are
the ones that are making waves right now, aren't they?
:-)
Author: Dinner
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#285115
...
> I know this won't change how anyone feels about it, but just know that we do
> take the time to research this thoroughly - probably more so than many who
Hey Ben, I'm sure there were meetings upon meetings- I'm talking more
philosophical/future, looking at "now" vs. "last quarter" or whatnot.
I think CF will be fine for a bit, but the times, they are a changing.
That's it. I don't care, really, besides a leaning towards the future, or
whatnot. Getting the newbs, keeping pace, all that good stuff.
Keeping the language alive.
I'm vested, obviously, after the years, but the patterns and whatnot is
what I've been digging on- that's applicable in a bunch of places.
This thread has gone on so long because the whole price bit has
been a "factor" for CF since a long time ago. If it's not done right
it can destroy the language, so no rush, but still...
**
I think for the speed increase alone, it's good for the extra Gees,
personally. Bravo on the whole deal, it's an excellent piece of
SW, she is. My compliments to the
chefs.
Author: James Holmes
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#285114
Well, sort of. Enterprises often use SLES, RHEL; versions of Linux
that are not free.
>
> By this argument, no "enterprises" use Linux, Apache, etc.- or some
> strange logic like that. Does that sound correct?
--
mxAjax / CFAjax docs and other useful articles:
http://www.bifrost.com.au/blog/
Author: AJ Mercer
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#285113
BlueDragon have come out with a price comparison
http://blog.newatlanta.com/index.cfm?mode=entry&entry=AE646136-1572-8D1B-6BB3123E7B8B1DE2
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Andrew Scott
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#285110
I also have to say that Groovy and Grails are awesome as well...
We use both here, and I am impressed.
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Sean Corfield
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#285108
> There might be more, but the only "throttle" in standard that I know of
> right off is that the cfdocument tag is single-threaded. Only one can
> execute on the server at a time.
I asked Google for "adobe.com EFR ColdFusion" and found some very
information comments in this thread:
http://www.forta.com/blog/index.cfm/2007/7/30/ColdFusion-8-Is-Here
Jason Delmore, ColdFusion Product Manager, explains (more than once)
what the EFR does. He also points folks to the new Performance Brief
published on the website. And he addresses the number of sites you can
run on Standard (by confirming the "guideline" statement that was
explained elsewhere in this thread).
As I noted (elsewhere in this thread I think?), if each EFR-throttled
request takes less than five seconds (extremely likely!) then you can
serve about 17k such requests per day. If each request takes two
seconds or less, you can serve about 43k such requests per day. That's
in addition to requests for all the non-EFR features in your app.
--
Sean A Corfield -- (904) 302-SEAN
An Architect's View -- http://corfield.org/
"If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive."
-- Margaret
Atwood
Author: Dinner
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#285106
...
> Change the comparison. It should not be about technologies, it should
> be about solutions.
This, actually, is one of my points- It seems like it's all about the tech,
vs. the solutions.
Solutions-wize, is actually where PHP and the other Open Languages
are challenging CF. Because of Open Source, if you ask me, but hey,
the fact remains, that PHP, etc. "solutions" are getting pretty freaking
slick. Easy, good UI design, etc.. Talk about Rapid! Sheesh!
Just playing with the (free) PHP plug-ins my host offers blew me away.
You could be half-brain dead and whip out a pretty nifty "solution".
-This is not how it used to be.-
Not to mention, they're not "server/CPU centric" like ColdFusion.
(Re: the google method, or whatever- farms or flocks, as the case
may be)
And CF is more a means, vs. a "solution", I reckon. Depending.
Since it's all solutions enveloped with/in solutions, or whatever.
**
I just can't stand this talk of "it's a hard sell to the enterprise cuz
it's so inexpensive (not cheap, tho ;)" being justification for a price
hike. The hard work put in, sure- but the "appearance" argument
pisses me of a bit.
The idea that money doesn't matter to enterprises, is ludicrous.
Seems like people think enterprise means unlimited $$? Or
that value is assessed using a single vector? The "Price" of X?!?!
By this argument, no "enterprises" use Linux, Apache, etc.- or some
strange logic like that. Does that sound correct? ROI is easy, right,
since everyone and their grandma is a millionaire? Oh, what, you
mean it's as complicated a topic as you'd like it to be? *sigh* I see.
**
Depends on your time frame, I guess.
So... calculating value is really that easy for folks, huh? Man, I'm a
freaking mess, I reckon. I find it sorta hard. Intangible, even.
**
I've never been much of one for licensing, tho. Support, sure- work,
fine- but money for having an idea? Seems like cheating.
I wonder what the world would be like if everything went public domain
after 7 years or whatever. ** Ok, enough crazyness.
Peace!
__
Sell people (the good way;) (or hardware).
PS says the dude making <$25 an hour
Author: Dale Fraser
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#285105
Sean
Your facts need review
> Ben did not say that anyone argued for *lower* prices. I expect
several people argued for even higher prices than we got.
I never said he did, I said everyone who might have fought for a lower
price.
> Well, you should have bought maintenance then, shouldn't you? :)
Wrong, CF7 came out more than 2 years ago so everyone who bought a
subscription with CF7 release wasted their money.
> Dude, I've been an enterprise systems architect for decades helping
large corporates with planning and budgets for software and
Yes I've managed multi million dollar projects, but you seem to think you
are the only one to be a real enterprise customer, and you just skipped over
the whole budgeting process that I was talking about.
Regards
Dale Fraser
http://dalefraser.blogspot.com
> Thanks for your response. I understand that it's not your decision and
that
> there are factors that impact pricing. I also understand that not everyone
> who might have fought for a lower price can always win, it's good that you
> had an opportunity to voice your opinion.
Ben did not say that anyone argued for *lower* prices. I expect
several people argued for even higher prices than we got.
> As I said in the original post CF8 is a great product and I have purchased
> it already. I purchased Standard however when I had budget for Enterprise,
> the 25% increase done at launch gave me no opportunity to budget or plan
for
> this expenditure.
Well, you should have bought maintenance then, shouldn't you? :)
> I mainly get upset due to the fact that CF is always being compared to
free
> products, PHP, .NET & Java and I constantly have to justify the price
Change the comparison. It should not be about technologies, it should
be about solutions.
> I can't imagine they will sell more Enterprise because if it's more
> expensive people will think it's a real Enterprise product. You say I
don't
> understand the enterprise market, well you are wrong
No, I'm right. You are wrong. If you were truly an enterprise customer
- buying enterprise software (as opposed to a customer that happened
to buy Enterprise Edition), you would be only too aware that CF is
extremely cheap and looks out of place on many infrastructure plans.
The higher price will be easier to sell to enterprises. Personally, I
think it's still too cheap. I think $9,995 for 2 CPUs would be a
better price for enterprise infrastructure budgets.
> If you understood enterprise's you would surely know that budgets
> and plans for expenditure need to be submitted at the start of the
financial
Dude, I've been an enterprise systems architect for decades helping
large corporates with planning and budgets for software and
infrastructure. I understand the enterprise market very well. I moved
to America because a company wanted my organization to pick up "small"
contracts... ones that involved less than $1m of licenses for their
software. I think the smallest software project we took on was $375k.
Mostly they were around $750k. At one point we created a *prototype*
for a European company where the budget was 750k GBP. For a
*prototype*! The second phase of the project was a multi-million pound
project (which they took to another company and, after they'd failed -
and cost them millions - they brought the project back to us).
Half a dozen CF Enterprise licenses would have been lost in the line
items in most of those projects.
> PS: Everyone will be very interested now in where they can find clear info
> on how the standard features are throttled ... Does such a document exist?
If you read the product documentation, this is all very clearly explained.
--
Sean A Corfield -- (904) 302-SEAN
An Architect's View -- http://corfield.org/
"If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive."
-- Margaret Atwood
Author: Brad Wood
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#285088
Refer to my post late last night. I outlined exactly what features are
throttled in standard in the " Server Monitoring in Standard" thread.
It's all available here:
http://www.adobe.com/products/coldfusion/pdfs/cf8_featurecomp.pdf
~Brad
===========================
PS: Everyone will be very interested now in where they can find clear
info
on how the standard features are throttled, I for one don't want to
start
debugging code when things go slow to find that the server is doing
this. I
want to know in advance of what every limit is. Does such a document
exist?
Regards
Dale Fraser
*****************************
I would agree..that would be useful info...Oh Adobe....
Eric
Author: Eric Roberts
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#285074
Nope...just good competition that will just improve CF in the long run.
Eric
> Larry
>
> Why move at all? I mean, the reason you would upgrade is to get
> features you dont currently have. Saying you will move to another
> engine which .. err.. last time I looked, didnt have those features,
> well, go for it!
Here's a possible reason: suppose he needs to deploy on JBoss and JDK 1.6?
If he's currently running CFMX7, that configuration isn't supported. This
leaves him two options: BD 7.0 or CF8. If price is important to him and he
doesn't need the new CF8 features that BD 7.0 doesn't support, then BD 7.0
is a valid choice.
Or, here's another possibility: what if what he really needs is not just
Java-to-.NET bridging (as provided in CF8), but full integration with
ASP.NET such as the ability to do session sharing? In this case,
BlueDragon.NET 7.0 is the only choice.
There are many "new" features in CF8 that are already supported by BD 7.0
(or earlier releases). None of these features are in CFMX7, but can be found
in both BD 7.0 and CF8:
- .NET integration
- image processing (CFIMAGE)
- query caching with CFQUERYPARAM
- CFC serialization (J2EE Session scope clustering)
- duplicate() for CFCs
- CFC interfaces
- multi-threaded programming (CFTHREAD)
- per-application mappings
- CFZIP/CFZIPPARAM
- onMissingTemplate event handler for Application.cfc
- Windows Vista / IIS7 support
- Mac OS X Intel support
- JBoss support
- JDK 1.5 and 1.6 support
Yes, there are features in CF8 that aren't in BD 7.0; there are also
features in BD 7.0 that aren't in CF8. The relevant questions are: which
features do you want, and how much do you want to pay?
My point is: it's not at all irrational or unreasonable for ATCC or others
to choose BD 7.0 over CF8, if BD 7.0 provides a better combination of
features and price to meet their needs.
Author: Eric Roberts
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#285075
ROFL
On Wednesday 01 Aug 2007, mark.drew@gmail.com wrote:
> If this thread goes on any longer I am going to double the price of
> CFEclipse so it fits into the Enterprise Market.
So we can advertise CFEclipse as 'twice as free' now, right ?
:-)
--
Tom Chiverton
****************************************************
This email is sent for and on behalf of Halliwells LLP.
Halliwells LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in England and
Wales under registered number OC307980 whose registered office address is at
St James's Court Brown Street Manchester M2 2JF. A list of members is
available for inspection at the registered office. Any reference to a
partner in relation to Halliwells LLP means a member of Halliwells LLP.
Regulated by the Law Society.
CONFIDENTIALITY
This email is intended only for the use of the addressee named above and may
be confidential or legally privileged. If you are not the addressee you
must not read it and must not use any information contained in nor copy it
nor inform any person other than Halliwells LLP or the addressee of its
existence or contents. If you have received this email in error please
delete it and notify Halliwells LLP IT Department on 0870 365 8008.
For more information about Halliwells LLP visit www.halliwells.com.
Author: Eric Roberts
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#285072
I will keep that in mind...I just know that was the solution for 6 and 7. I
would assume they would be releasing something that is compatable with 1.6
in the near future. Mark this down as one of the many reasons why I dislike
Oracle *grin*.
Eric
A quick check of the latest Oracle thin client download page shows
that Java up to 1.5 is supported. Since CF8 ships with Java 6, there
may be a further issue.
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
--
mxAjax / CFAjax docs and other useful articles:
http://www.bifrost.com.au/blog/
Author: Eric Roberts
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#285061
See below
Ben,
<snipped>
I mainly get upset due to the fact that CF is always being compared to free
products, PHP, .NET & Java and I constantly have to justify the price, to me
and a lot of others this price increase was just unexpected. I really wonder
how many people who were going to purchase Enterprise purchased Standard
instead, either due to the price or the fact that standard has more
features.
****************************************
It gets compared because the talking heads are deceptive when they say that
they are free, when in reality they are not. Allaire/Macromedia/Adobe also
have some guilt in this in that none of them ever countered this. As I said
in a previous posting, Ben wrote an article about this for CFDJ, but that
was the only mention of this disparity in the truth.
Allaire/Macromedia/Adobe should be using this information to contradict this
misinformation campaign and they have all failed miserably in this and other
marketing aspects. Maybe a good suggestion for the adobe folks would be to
put up a product comparison page that shows the approximate costs (both
development and purchase) costs to get the other languages up to par with CF
out of the box. Someone needs to give the Adobe marketing team a good swift
kick in the behind and get them on the ball.
******************************************
Sean,
I can't imagine they will sell more Enterprise because if it's more
expensive people will think it's a real Enterprise product. You say I don't
understand the enterprise market, well you are wrong, I am one of these
customers. If you understood enterprise's you would surely know that budgets
and plans for expenditure need to be submitted at the start of the financial
year. I am now one less enterprise customer, but I guess they can afford to
lose 25% of the enterprise customers and still break even.
***************************
You would be surprised on just how stupid executives can be in big
companies. I have heard this more than I care to remember. It does sound
really asinine, because, well...it is very asinine, but that is how they
think. They are used to enterprise level products that cost in the 10's and
100's of thousands of dollars (I remember doing some research on this an
there was a java based product (this was about 10 years ago) that cost
100k...so I am not exaggerating. Look at Oracle web services...that costs
over 10k and all that offers is a Java development platform that works with
the database.) This is kind of a self-image issue as well. If they paid
this much and can justify what they paid for these other products, how can
CF be a worthy product if it is so cheap compared to these other products?
If there is a product that is a qualified and useful enterprise level web
development solution that is that cheap, then they were pretty stupid to
spend 10's and 100's of thousands of dollars on the other stuff.
Most also have discretionary spending allowed for in the budget or are
allowed some leeway for instances like that. I am sure that if you went to
your bosses and say, hey they increased the price by 750(?) a CPU...we need
x amount of dollars added to our budget to cover this unexpected
increase...I am sure they would ok it. All the in you had was that there
probably wouldn't be an increase, so you could not have guessed that there
would be. Unless you work for a really small company (and I mean really
small...and if it is...then as several had stated before...you probably
don't need enterprise anyway), if your company is that inflexible that they
cannot absorb a couple of thousand dollars in this, then they might just
have grater issues that should concern you more.
*******
<snipped>
PS: Everyone will be very interested now in where they can find clear info
on how the standard features are throttled, I for one don't want to start
debugging code when things go slow to find that the server is doing this. I
want to know in advance of what every limit is. Does such a document exist?
Regards
Dale Fraser
*****************************
I would agree..that would be useful info...Oh Adobe....
Eric
Author: John Mason
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#285060
One of the points here was that other software has more of a "price spread"
than Adobe CF currently. Don't get too focused in on the numbers. The other
point was that enterprise level software is expensive. Surprise! Sure
there's J2EE stuff that as expensive if not more, I stand corrected there.
But Microsoft, Oracle (to some point) and others have layers of product
versions to cover the purchasing power our their customers.
To use a car analogy. Not everyone can afford an Aston-Martin DB5 but they
don't want a used 70's VW bug either. There's a range that all the car
companies cover with slightly different lines. The same is true for
software. It's actually good, it means there's a big enough market for CF to
have a real price spread of more than 2 versions. If Adobe ran a simple
pricing analysis, I bet with a new 'business version' they would end up
making more money than having just Standard/Enterprise versions.
John Mason
mason@fusionlink.com
770.337.8363
www.FusionLink.com - ColdFusion and Flex hosting
Now offering ColdFusion 8 Enterprise hosting
FREE Subversion hosting
We just purchased SQL Server licenses and it's only the actual processor
that counts. You could have a quad core and it would only be one license.
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
I'm not sure if this pricing is an accurate representation. Sure SQL server
standard is around $1800 with 5 CALs, but if you want to use it for a web
app, you will need a per processor license. Let's say you have a standard
dual core 2 duo box. That's 4 virtual processors. If I'm reading the
licensing terms correctly, you would need 4 processor licenses (assuming you
want to utilize all 4 processors).
This comes out to $5999 per processor x 4 processors, $23996 for the
standard version, $24,999 per processor x 4 processors, $95984 for the
enterprise version. Of course if you're buying the enterprise version,
you're probably doing it for failover or some sort of clustering, in which
case you will likely have 2 servers, so it will be close to $200k for the
enterprise version.
Of course there's the express version, which does most of what you would
need as long as you don't need more then 1 cpu, 1GB of ram and 4GB of db
size.
I think MS did a good move by releasing the express version. This might
hurt sales, as a lot of people would be happy with just the express version,
but once people start outgrowing it, they will have no choice but to plunk
down $6k per CPU for the standard edition.
Mind you that CF only charges per physical processor and the enterprise
license covers 2 physical CPUs (last time I checked). This means you can
have 2 quad-core or higher CPUs and you're good as far as CF is concenrned.
You can also have unlimited virtual machines on the 2 physical CPUs, and run
a copy of standard edition in each of them, and you're still good as far as
licensing is concerned.
Russ
Author: Eric Roberts
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#285052
We can also hearken back to the old article Ben Forta wrote in regards to
ASP being free (this can relate to .NET and PHP). Keep in mind, this
article is several years old (I believe he wrote it when CF5 was the current
version). Ben estimated, that through either cost of development time or
cost of purchasing modules to "upgrade" ASP's functionality, to get ASP up
to the same functional level as CF is right out of the box, it would cost
over $36,000. I wonder what that cost breakdown would be today between CF8
features and J2EE servers without CF, .NET, and PHP? While the initial cost
may be cheaper or free, the actual cost is more than likely going to be a
lot greater (I would include the cost of training as well and the time costs
required for gaining proficiency in the respective languages). I bet the
results would show that .Net and PHP are not so cost effective.
Eric
....
> JBoss Enterprise 4,500
Hey, here's an apple!
> Another point for the Adobe people, I remember when the
standard/enterprise
> started and there was a lot complaining back then. With the price gap
> getting wider, maybe it's time for a third version, let's call it a
> "Business" version. That provides some of the least costly new features
and
> provides a bridge (or stepping stone) from standard to enterprise. I think
> that would solve a lot of issues with this and take almost nothing for
Adobe
> to do.
Excellent post, and idea! I love the places that are like, "well, what do
you do? How much money do you make? Etc., etc." and then have the
price-swaying power to work with you. Compromise, in some cases,
and just plain "helping a brother out", in others.
Probably hell on the accountants, and whatnot, and you got X complaining
that Y got Z for AA, or whatever. Still, I've seen it work (and IIRC, with
CF,
back in the day). Eh.
Great post tho, thanks.
Author: Arthur.Frey
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#285051
I really this this horse is dead, and has been dead for a while. The
truth is that if you go to a Cadillac dealer with $15,000 they tell me
to go to another dealership.
Billy Cox wrote:
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Eric Roberts
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#285048
...*handing Brad a sense of humor*...it was a joke. Relax... I think
Google is an unofficial part of the community. It's probably one of the
more valuable resources for CF besides CFWACK and this list...
Eric
Lol. Thanks's for the insult.
I purposely asked on the list because:
1) It was a thread that actually technical for once
2) I figured other people could benefit from the answer
3) I wanted to know how Brian was using it in the context of CF, which
Google probably won't tell me.
Kind of like when you ask a question in the class for the benefit of
everyone else as much as yourself. Heck, we could just shut this list
down, and forward all houseoffusion traffic to
www.justfriggingoogleit.com but that would sort of defeat the community,
wouldn't it?
~Brad
> That sure sounds cool.
> What is it?
www.justfuckinggoogleit.com
http://www.google.com/search?q=fips+140
Author: Andy Matthews
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#285047
We just purchased SQL Server licenses and it's only the actual processor
that counts. You could have a quad core and it would only be one license.
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
I'm not sure if this pricing is an accurate representation. Sure SQL server
standard is around $1800 with 5 CALs, but if you want to use it for a web
app, you will need a per processor license. Let's say you have a standard
dual core 2 duo box. That's 4 virtual processors. If I'm reading the
licensing terms correctly, you would need 4 processor licenses (assuming you
want to utilize all 4 processors).
This comes out to $5999 per processor x 4 processors, $23996 for the
standard version, $24,999 per processor x 4 processors, $95984 for the
enterprise version. Of course if you're buying the enterprise version,
you're probably doing it for failover or some sort of clustering, in which
case you will likely have 2 servers, so it will be close to $200k for the
enterprise version.
Of course there's the express version, which does most of what you would
need as long as you don't need more then 1 cpu, 1GB of ram and 4GB of db
size.
I think MS did a good move by releasing the express version. This might
hurt sales, as a lot of people would be happy with just the express version,
but once people start outgrowing it, they will have no choice but to plunk
down $6k per CPU for the standard edition.
Mind you that CF only charges per physical processor and the enterprise
license covers 2 physical CPUs (last time I checked). This means you can
have 2 quad-core or higher CPUs and you're good as far as CF is concenrned.
You can also have unlimited virtual machines on the 2 physical CPUs, and run
a copy of standard edition in each of them, and you're still good as far as
licensing is concerned.
Russ
Author: Russ
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#285043
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
I'm not sure if this pricing is an accurate representation. Sure SQL server
standard is around $1800 with 5 CALs, but if you want to use it for a web
app, you will need a per processor license. Let's say you have a standard
dual core 2 duo box. That's 4 virtual processors. If I'm reading the
licensing terms correctly, you would need 4 processor licenses (assuming you
want to utilize all 4 processors).
This comes out to $5999 per processor x 4 processors, $23996 for the
standard version, $24,999 per processor x 4 processors, $95984 for the
enterprise version. Of course if you're buying the enterprise version,
you're probably doing it for failover or some sort of clustering, in which
case you will likely have 2 servers, so it will be close to $200k for the
enterprise version.
Of course there's the express version, which does most of what you would
need as long as you don't need more then 1 cpu, 1GB of ram and 4GB of db
size.
I think MS did a good move by releasing the express version. This might
hurt sales, as a lot of people would be happy with just the express version,
but once people start outgrowing it, they will have no choice but to plunk
down $6k per CPU for the standard edition.
Mind you that CF only charges per physical processor and the enterprise
license covers 2 physical CPUs (last time I checked). This means you can
have 2 quad-core or higher CPUs and you're good as far as CF is concenrned.
You can also have unlimited virtual machines on the 2 physical CPUs, and run
a copy of standard edition in each of them, and you're still good as far as
licensing is concerned.
Russ
Author: Billy Cox
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#285042
Why could you not provide the license free or at reduced price and pad the
cost into other invoice items? When I buy stuff on the web, I am a sucker
for free shipping - knowing that it's not really free.
If a client balks at buying a server license, why not sell them a dedicated
hosting plan with CF support so that the cost is spread out over months? You
have to take advantage of the fact that most people can't do basic math.
When I visit a car dealership, the salesman might *like* to sell me a Shelby
Mustang, but if I only have $15,000 to spend he will not let me leave the
car lot without trying to sell me a used Ford Focus.
The point I'm getting to is that this has nothing to do with Adobe's
pricing, and it has everything to do with salesmanship.
I just want to get Adobe to drop the price. It's a hard sell to some clients
and we've lost some opportunities because of it. I'll always continue to use
CF as my mainstay, but also learning .net is not a bad thing... And whenever
we have lost a site it's always been to .net technology.
For what it's worth I've always been, and still am a CF advocate. But the
reality is it's a business market and it's doesn't hurt to have alternative
options to give your clients.
Author: Tom Chiverton
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#285035
On Wednesday 01 Aug 2007, mark.drew@gmail.com wrote:
> If this thread goes on any longer I am going to double the price of
> CFEclipse so it fits into the Enterprise Market.
So we can advertise CFEclipse as 'twice as free' now, right ?
:-)
--
Tom Chiverton
****************************************************
This email is sent for and on behalf of Halliwells LLP.
Halliwells LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in England and Wales
under registered number OC307980 whose registered office address is at St James's
Court Brown Street Manchester M2 2JF. A list of members is available for
inspection at the registered office. Any reference to a partner in relation to
Halliwells LLP means a member of Halliwells LLP. Regulated by the Law Society.
CONFIDENTIALITY
This email is intended only for the use of the addressee named above and may be
confidential or legally privileged. If you are not the addressee you must not
read it and must not use any information contained in nor copy it nor inform any
person other than Halliwells LLP or the addressee of its existence or contents.
If you have received this email in error please delete it and notify Halliwells
LLP IT Department on 0870 365 8008.
For more information about Halliwells LLP visit www.halliwells.com.
Author: Vince Bonfanti
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#285034
> Larry
>
> Why move at all? I mean, the reason you would upgrade is to get
> features you dont currently have. Saying you will move to another
> engine which .. err.. last time I looked, didnt have those features,
> well, go for it!
Here's a possible reason: suppose he needs to deploy on JBoss and JDK 1.6? If
he's currently running CFMX7, that configuration isn't supported. This leaves him
two options: BD 7.0 or CF8. If price is important to him and he doesn't need the
new CF8 features that BD 7.0 doesn't support, then BD 7.0 is a valid choice.
Or, here's another possibility: what if what he really needs is not just
Java-to-.NET bridging (as provided in CF8), but full integration with ASP.NET
such as the ability to do session sharing? In this case, BlueDragon.NET 7.0 is
the only choice.
There are many "new" features in CF8 that are already supported by BD 7.0 (or
earlier releases). None of these features are in CFMX7, but can be found in both
BD 7.0 and CF8:
- .NET integration
- image processing (CFIMAGE)
- query caching with CFQUERYPARAM
- CFC serialization (J2EE Session scope clustering)
- duplicate() for CFCs
- CFC interfaces
- multi-threaded programming (CFTHREAD)
- per-application mappings
- CFZIP/CFZIPPARAM
- onMissingTemplate event handler for Application.cfc
- Windows Vista / IIS7 support
- Mac OS X Intel support
- JBoss support
- JDK 1.5 and 1.6 support
Yes, there are features in CF8 that aren't in BD 7.0; there are also features in
BD 7.0 that aren't in CF8. The relevant questions are: which features do you
want, and how much do you want to pay?
My point is: it's not at all irrational or unreasonable for ATCC or others to
choose BD 7.0 over CF8, if BD 7.0 provides a better combination of features and
price to meet their needs.
Author: Mark Drew
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#285032
If this thread goes on any longer I am going to double the price of
CFEclipse so it fits into the Enterprise Market.
We are in no way an "enterprise" company, but the price increase is
basically 2 days of a developer. With the Ajax features, we have
already made that money back.
MD
Author: Peterson, Chris
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#285031
I personally would love to see a 'Coldfusion Express' edition come out
again, like back in the Allaire days. Access to CFQuery, output, loops,
<cfif and logic, cffile, etc. Basically, nothing that cost Adobe any
licensing costs to integrate (maybe sans built-in DB support, just let
users add JDBC / ODBC drivers). I think if they were to compete with
.NET on a free level, we would have a ton more developers learning the
language, and a lot less complaining about price.
Chris Peterson
Gainey IT
Adobe Certified Advanced Coldfusion Developer
-----Original Message-----
> Another point for the Adobe people, I remember when the
> standard/enterprise started and there was a lot complaining back then.
> With the price gap getting wider, maybe it's time for a third version,
> let's call it a "Business" version. That provides some of the least
> costly new features and provides a bridge (or stepping stone) from
> standard to enterprise. I think that would solve a lot of issues with
> this and take almost nothing for Adobe to do.
Author: mac jordan
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#285024
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
I want to know this too.
--
mac jordan
home: www.kestrel.org
work: www.webhorus.net
them: www.jordan-cats.org
Author: Larry Lyons
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#285018
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
you know the insults are not really necessary.
Author: Andrew Scott
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#285016
Agreed...
And from that I will add that I am about to release in the next few weeks a
CFReport clone, based of a java open source project the technology I chose
actually rocks, and compared to Crystal Reports it rocks and the designer is
by far the best I have seen even better than JasperReports and that is
saying something.
I not only wrote this in JSTL, and as a servlet, but it took me very little
time that we are going to use across all our projects plus more.
As far as PDF, and flex goes there are plenty of open source alternatives
that are going to kill Coldfusion.
Adobe needs to do something and do it fast, otherwise there will be very
little usage as far as Coldfusion goes in the market place.
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Brad Wood
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#285009
There might be more, but the only "throttle" in standard that I know of
right off is that the cfdocument tag is single-threaded. Only one can
execute on the server at a time.
~Brad
PS: Everyone will be very interested now in where they can find clear
info
on how the standard features are throttled, I for one don't want to
start
debugging code when things go slow to find that the server is doing
this. I
want to know in advance of what every limit is. Does such a document
exist?
Author: Brad Wood
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#285006
We have a subscription. We called Adobe today and apparently we are
waiting for a coupon code to arrive in our E-mail. This might take up
to two weeks they said.
I sure am glad we got the subscription, but 2 weeks feels like forever
right now. :)
~Brad
any idea when those of us with the upgrade subscription thingie
can expect our copies to show up?
thanks
tony :)
Author: Sean Corfield
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284999
> Thanks for your response. I understand that it's not your decision and that
> there are factors that impact pricing. I also understand that not everyone
> who might have fought for a lower price can always win, it's good that you
> had an opportunity to voice your opinion.
Ben did not say that anyone argued for *lower* prices. I expect
several people argued for even higher prices than we got.
> As I said in the original post CF8 is a great product and I have purchased
> it already. I purchased Standard however when I had budget for Enterprise,
> the 25% increase done at launch gave me no opportunity to budget or plan for
> this expenditure.
Well, you should have bought maintenance then, shouldn't you? :)
> I mainly get upset due to the fact that CF is always being compared to free
> products, PHP, .NET & Java and I constantly have to justify the price
Change the comparison. It should not be about technologies, it should
be about solutions.
> I can't imagine they will sell more Enterprise because if it's more
> expensive people will think it's a real Enterprise product. You say I don't
> understand the enterprise market, well you are wrong
No, I'm right. You are wrong. If you were truly an enterprise customer
- buying enterprise software (as opposed to a customer that happened
to buy Enterprise Edition), you would be only too aware that CF is
extremely cheap and looks out of place on many infrastructure plans.
The higher price will be easier to sell to enterprises. Personally, I
think it's still too cheap. I think $9,995 for 2 CPUs would be a
better price for enterprise infrastructure budgets.
> If you understood enterprise's you would surely know that budgets
> and plans for expenditure need to be submitted at the start of the financial
Dude, I've been an enterprise systems architect for decades helping
large corporates with planning and budgets for software and
infrastructure. I understand the enterprise market very well. I moved
to America because a company wanted my organization to pick up "small"
contracts... ones that involved less than $1m of licenses for their
software. I think the smallest software project we took on was $375k.
Mostly they were around $750k. At one point we created a *prototype*
for a European company where the budget was 750k GBP. For a
*prototype*! The second phase of the project was a multi-million pound
project (which they took to another company and, after they'd failed -
and cost them millions - they brought the project back to us).
Half a dozen CF Enterprise licenses would have been lost in the line
items in most of those projects.
> PS: Everyone will be very interested now in where they can find clear info
> on how the standard features are throttled ... Does such a document exist?
If you read the product documentation, this is all very clearly explained.
--
Sean A Corfield -- (904) 302-SEAN
An Architect's View -- http://corfield.org/
"If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive."
-- Margaret
Atwood
Author: James Holmes
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284996
A quick check of the latest Oracle thin client download page shows
that Java up to 1.5 is supported. Since CF8 ships with Java 6, there
may be a further issue.
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
--
mxAjax / CFAjax docs and other useful articles:
http://www.bifrost.com.au/blog/
Author: Andrew Scott
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284995
Which is why we are a java shop now, enterprise applications are cheaper
overall to integrate into open source solutions, and then when you have a
$7.5k license to an application you are developing and use only about 2% of
the features to distribute your application costs more with Coldfusion 8.
But, on the other side of the coin as Java developers we have a better way
of dealing with this problem. Since moving to Java a few months ago I have
emulated enough of Coldfusion into JSTL to do what we need, the time
invested is minimal when you think about the overall use that these JSTL's
are going to beneficial to us.
And we can now turn a $2k investment in time, into about $100 per
application we sell. This is why the price of Coldfusion in an Enterprise
environment will never be taken seriously by the people who make the
decisions.
And what would have been a better move, in my opinion is to open source the
engine and modulate those that need to retain IP or licensing costs, Adobe
would have found that with this sort of business approach Adobe would
actually make more money with Coldfusion than they do now as well as
capturing more market share in the enterprise market.
And you wonder why so many enterprise developers look towards open source
software, and support these business models more than ever.
The overall concept of one application that does everything is very
appealing, however the cost is not so appealing.
Andrew Scott
Senior Coldfusion Developer
Aegeon Pty. Ltd.
www.aegeon.com.au
Phone:Â +613 Â 8676 4223
Mobile: 0404 998 273
Rick...
You make compelling arguments. But IMO, if you have to explain the ROI to
someone, then you've already lost the battle. There might be a few people
that would be convinced by your (compelling) arguments. But most people are
going to see that price tag and not even BOTHER reading the rest of the
stuff about it.
They'll simply think "CF is too much for my budget" and go install PHP or
something.
andy
Author: Rey Bango
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284991
Casey,
To further back your case, anyone that is sitting here thinking that
they *have* to buy CF for their development is incorrect. You can
download a copy right now and use the developer edition for free. So
along with your great statement about having clients pay for their
hosting, there's no reason why anyone should not be able to effectively
use CF for their development.
For those that need good, inexpensive ColdFusion 8 hosting,
HostMySite.com has started offering it at $21.95/month:
http://hostmysite.com/hosting/builder/
Rey...
Casey Dougall wrote:
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: John Mason
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284990
>Trust me, I really don't want to jump ship but when people keep whispering
PHP/ASP etc. to management, and the product cost is, well free. It makes it
a really hard sell. We have also had,in the past a really hard time finding
good quality CF developers.
--------------------------
Others have mention this already but PHP and ASP are only free if you don't
value your time and you prefer to write larger amounts of code. Granted,
it's hard to sale this to management sometimes with the prices printed right
there, but you could do a simple code off. Do a set of code in ASP, PHP and
ColdFusion that simply calls a datasource and outputs the data. This is a
very basic operation that we all do and it doesn't take much to appreciate
the simplicity of CF in this example. Now magnify that difference over
weeks, months or years. The time alone you're saving should easy balance out
the price.
Now finding experienced CF developers, yes, the field is tight. Here in
Atlanta they work for the companies like UPS, Alltel, Federal Reserve, etc.
Hardly a dying language, but yes experienced Cfers are expensive and in
short supply. Good news for all of us :)
But frankly I think that people forget how quickly they themselves probably
learned CF. Don't go around looking for a CF guy, just pull some CIS/CS
majors straight out of college. Most of them now have basic Java/OO/XML
experience. They probably haven't heard of CF and wouldn't know to look for
a job in that area, but learning CF with this background takes very little
time at all. Plus you'll get them on the cheap :)
John Mason
mason@fusionlink.com
770.337.8363
www.FusionLink.com - ColdFusion and Flex hosting
Now offering ColdFusion 8 Enterprise hosting
FREE Subversion hosting
Author: Dave Watts
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284988
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
You might want to look at some other J2EE app servers, if you thing CF 8 is
priced comparatively high. WebSphere, WebLogic, Oracle AS ...
Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software
http://www.figleaf.com/
Fig Leaf Software provides the highest caliber vendor-authorized
instruction at our training centers in Washington DC, Atlanta,
Chicago, Baltimore, Northern Virginia, or on-site at your location.
Visit http://training.figleaf.com/ for more information!
This email has been processed by SmoothZap - www.smoothwall.net
Author: Dave Watts
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284987
> The .Net development not only creates the web service but it
> also creates WSDL and a Test page to test the web service.
CF creates WSDL in the same manner. No test page, though.
> I've also found the web service code generated by CF does not
> include the proper header info, which has caused some application
> developers a headache consuming some of the web services.
And what "proper header info" is that exactly?
Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software
http://www.figleaf.com/
Fig Leaf Software provides the highest caliber vendor-authorized
instruction at our training centers in Washington DC, Atlanta,
Chicago, Baltimore, Northern Virginia, or on-site at your location.
Visit http://training.figleaf.com/ for more information!
This email has been processed by SmoothZap - www.smoothwall.net
Author: Dale Fraser
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284985
Ben,
Thanks for your response. I understand that it's not your decision and that
there are factors that impact pricing. I also understand that not everyone
who might have fought for a lower price can always win, it's good that you
had an opportunity to voice your opinion.
As I said in the original post CF8 is a great product and I have purchased
it already. I purchased Standard however when I had budget for Enterprise,
the 25% increase done at launch gave me no opportunity to budget or plan for
this expenditure.
I mainly get upset due to the fact that CF is always being compared to free
products, PHP, .NET & Java and I constantly have to justify the price, to me
and a lot of others this price increase was just unexpected. I really wonder
how many people who were going to purchase Enterprise purchased Standard
instead, either due to the price or the fact that standard has more
features.
Sean,
I can't imagine they will sell more Enterprise because if it's more
expensive people will think it's a real Enterprise product. You say I don't
understand the enterprise market, well you are wrong, I am one of these
customers. If you understood enterprise's you would surely know that budgets
and plans for expenditure need to be submitted at the start of the financial
year. I am now one less enterprise customer, but I guess they can afford to
lose 25% of the enterprise customers and still break even.
Time will tell if this was a good or bad decision or now, we will never know
I guess until version 9 is released and see if anything changes.
PS: Everyone will be very interested now in where they can find clear info
on how the standard features are throttled, I for one don't want to start
debugging code when things go slow to find that the server is doing this. I
want to know in advance of what every limit is. Does such a document exist?
Regards
Dale Fraser
http://dalefraser.blogspot.com
And I've not weighed in because frankly, there is little for me to add. Like
all of you, I have opinions about pricing, but I am not the final decision
maker - I do voice my opinions, and sometimes they align with those of the
wider CF team and sometimes not, but once a decision is made I have to live
with it. If you are expecting me to denounce a product decision in public
(and no, I am not saying that I would denounce this one) then think again,
that would be more than inappropriate.
And to be very fair, I was asked many times about possible pricing increases
over the past 1/2 year, including at many of the usergroups we visited. And
my answer every time was that A) we've not raised the price in a while,
there has been pressure to do so, and so it was a possibility, B) *if* there
would be price increases we would try to limit the users impacted by it, C)
if there would be a price increase then it would be an incremental one, and
the price would not increase by several times, D) buy subscriptions now and
you'll not have to deal with this if the price does in fact increase. And I
think that my responses were indeed correct.
And finally, we've been debating price increases for several versions
already. And with each edition we debated the issue for a long time and
decided to postpone any increase. Now, after 5 years or so, we have indeed
increased the price of Enterprise only, while simultaneously making Standard
a more compelling option for even more users. But, others have explained
this already.
Beyond this I have nothing else to say on the topic, at this point I am too
busy with features and customers.
--- Ben
Let me be absolutely clear on something Dale.
1) I have nothing to do with the prices Adobe charge. Last time I
checked, I don't work for Adobe. If Adobe wants to hire me, they can
give me a call, but until then, I don't see how you can put this on
me. What the hell did I do?
2) I've been spending my time blogging about features. I figure my
readers care more about that. I haven't been avoiding pricing. I've
just been focused on what interests ME and what I assume interests my
readers. If you want to know what I think about the prices, then ask.
But to act like I'm some kind of conspiracy with Adobe to make people
not notice the prices is flat out wrong.
3) I have NEVER refrained from speaking my mind about CF. Now I'll be
honest and say I've rarely complained. That isn't to say I haven't.
Shoot, I bad mouth CFLOGON all the time, and I freely share WHY it
bugs me.
I hope folks forgive me for my language above but I'm a bit pissed as
to how I'm being dragged into this.
> What's the deal with people who think that you should be happy to pay more
> because there are new features.
>
> That makes no sense what so ever. If there were no new features, then you
> wouldn't need a new version. It's the quantity and quality of new features
> that makes people decide if they are even going to upgrade. The fact that
> it's an upgrade means they get your money again, so there is no need to
get
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Dinner
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284981
Another thing to keep in mind, is, Open Source.
It's starting to Crush, you know? Still hasn't flipped the
script, but we're getting close. Seriously close.
Guess it's sorta like the tulip thing, or whatever- The
stock market, etc.- You ride as long as you can, and
hope you don't stay too long (wipeout).
I don't mind if Adobe wants to ride the wave for a bit
more- heck, seems logical- but mark my words, it
will be a different "model" in not-too-long.
Sorta. The more things change...
Ha! Mark my words... I love that. Mark 'em! =P
PS just delete this if it's too off topic :)
Author: Eric Roberts
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284979
Yeah...isn't MS discontinuing support for VB?
Eric
I would love to see the ROI calculation on this decision:
x amount for classes
x amount for time to attend the classes (as an aside, learn C# instead of
vb.net... you will thank me later)
x time to actually get proficient at .NET
x copies of Visual Studio
x time to convert existing CF code
Seems you could buy a lot of copies of CF Enterprise with that.
Now, I'm pretty pragmatic about language selection - CF is not the only, or
always the best, choice, but this type of knee-jerk reaction to a minor
price hike strikes me as a more than a bit over the top.
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Dinner
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284978
...
> JBoss Enterprise 4,500
Hey, here's an apple!
> Another point for the Adobe people, I remember when the standard/enterprise
> started and there was a lot complaining back then. With the price gap
> getting wider, maybe it's time for a third version, let's call it a
> "Business" version. That provides some of the least costly new features and
> provides a bridge (or stepping stone) from standard to enterprise. I think
> that would solve a lot of issues with this and take almost nothing for Adobe
> to do.
Excellent post, and idea! I love the places that are like, "well, what do
you do? How much money do you make? Etc., etc." and then have the
price-swaying power to work with you. Compromise, in some cases,
and just plain "helping a brother out", in others.
Probably hell on the accountants, and whatnot, and you got X complaining
that Y got Z for AA, or whatever. Still, I've seen it work (and IIRC, with CF,
back in the day). Eh.
Great post tho,
thanks.
Author: Bruce Sorge
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284977
This happened to me when I was working at Baylor. When new management took
over, they were totally on the MS banswagon and I was forced to learn
.NET/C#. They completely did away with over 5 years of Intranet in
ColdFusion and decided to convert it all to .NET. I was disappointed that
they did not give CF a chance and excited to learn a new technology. I
became frustrated when I discovered that it took me more than twice as long
to write .NET code as it did CF. And I was re-writing the sites that I
originally did in CF, so it is not as though I were not familiar with the
app. In a nutshell, MS thinks "Why go three houses down to get there when
you can go around the block?". I will forever stay with CF if I can. Of
course I keep my .NET skills up just in case.
Since I am in a brand spanky new position at our school district, I get to
call the shots and they just ordered me SQL Server 2005 and CF8 along with
new hardware to go with them. Pretty exciting. And I am going to get my FLEX
skills up to the level where I can re-write the district website in FLEX.
Wooo Hoo.
So Robert, get ready to spend more time coding. Heh.
Robert,
Its sad to see any developer give up on CF but it sounds that by you
saying, "I just got my company to pay for a series of classes for .net
and vb.net", its a decision that you've been mulling for some time. You
just don't wake up one day and arbitrarily say, "I'm going to drop
several thousands of dollars on retooling our staff".
Rey...
Author: Eric Roberts
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284976
Big shocker...a price increase. Get over it dude. Every company has cost
increases. Those cost increases are usually translated into price
increases. Welcome to reality Dale. I don't know which market you were
refereeing to before where software is getting cheaper or free...maybe in
the hobby market or the real small business market. Everywhere else,
enterprise level software is more expensive...with CF being among the least
expensive of the lot.
Eric
What's the deal with people who think that you should be happy to pay more
because there are new features.
That makes no sense what so ever. If there were no new features, then you
wouldn't need a new version. It's the quantity and quality of new features
that makes people decide if they are even going to upgrade. The fact that
it's an upgrade means they get your money again, so there is no need to get
your money again + a premium for new features.
If all the ColdFusion die hard's who go hide in a hole and don't speak up
when something like this stupid pricing happens then these problems are
never going to get addressed. People are too scared to say what they think
and risk tainting their perfect CF image.
I note that Ben & Ray have had nothing to say about the increased pricing,
in fact they just kinda did a soft release and hope that it would sweep
under the carpet, and no one would notice. Very Poor!
Regards
Dale Fraser
http://dalefraser.blogspot.com
Author: Eric Roberts
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284974
You have to use the Thin client and then it works fine.
Eric
Unless the Oracle supplied driver has changed recently, some things
don't work the same as the DataDirect CF Oracle driver, like stored
procs returning results from ref cursors and BLOBS. If it has changed,
great.
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
example, Standard Edition would be fine for me but I need Oracle access and
now I need to pay twice that just to do supported Oracle connectivity. We
are an enterprise and when I discussed this with management they came back
and said we should just invest our time in ASP.NET. We can retrain our
developers, and not worry about buying upgrades and we'll get new features
as they come out. You know, I don't disagree with them. I just recently
started playing with Visual Studio .Net, and it's far easier to write web
services and create great web content.
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
finally a
> > product that I would really label Enterprise." Not to say CF7 wasn't
> > Enterprise, it had some great features and was a great release, but I
think
> > the monitoring and some of the Administration changes helped make it
really
> > enterprise friendly. Thats not mentioning the performance enhancements,
> > exchange integration (which currently means nothing to Lotus Shops
bleh),
> > and whole suite of ajax tools that really make CF shine as a UI web
layer
> > for large Java apps.
> >
> > You have to look at this product and realize enterprise is worthless to
you
> > unless you really need super scalability. Standard has it all, albeit
> > limited/throttled. Sure cfthread and exchange integration and PDF (?)
are
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
to
> > expensive to you then you probably don't need it, or you need to look
at
> > some other Enterprise software costs and revisit in 15 minutes. Hell I
say
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Jim Wright
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284972
> With the price gap
> getting wider, maybe it's time for a third version, let's call it a
> "Business" version. That provides some of the least costly new features and
> provides a bridge (or stepping stone) from standard to enterprise. I think
> that would solve a lot of issues with this and take almost nothing for Adobe
> to do.
>
It seems like they have actually done this somewhat, by allowing more
of the "Enterprise" features to be enabled in Standard, just throttled
to one request at a time. And that without a price increase to
Standard.
Author: Raymond Camden
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284971
And if we are going to compare Web Service features - CF makes
automatic documentation for web services. That's probably just as
useful as a test page. :)
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Raymond Camden
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284970
So it makes the WSDL and a test page. CF makes the WSDL as well. Now a
test page - I grant you - would be nice. That could be a good edition
to CFEclipse.
I haven't heard of any issues with the WSDL CF produces. Have you
logged bug reports for these?
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Ben Forta
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284968
I know I am going to regret saying this, but what the heck ...
Regardless of how anyone feels about the price change, just know that this
decision was NOT made in a vacuum. In fact, the team polled lots of
ColdFusion customers to ask them their opinion on this. And the general
feedback, even from those who would rather we not charge more, was that the
price change was fair and not inappropriate.
I know this won't change how anyone feels about it, but just know that we do
take the time to research this thoroughly - probably more so than many who
are making "definitive" statements on the subject.
--- Ben
> What's the deal with people who think that you should be happy to pay more
> because there are new features.
I think you're completely missing the point: there are many companies
out there that view CFMX 7 as "too cheap" at $3k/CPU. They don't think
it is serious software so they won't buy it. The increased price
actually helps sell to those enterprise companies. And the (frankly)
small price hike won't put other enterprises off.
If you think enterprise is too expensive, you simply aren't an
enterprise company!
Hardly any enterprise software costs less than $6k/CPU. Go look at
WebLogic and WebSphere (or almost anything from IBM!). Go look at
Oracle.
Someone pointed at the DataDirect drivers which cost $4k retail -
included in CF Enterprise.
> That makes no sense what so ever.
It makes perfect sense - if you understand the enterprise market.
> People are too scared to say what they think
> and risk tainting their perfect CF image.
No, this thread has 60+ responses already so folks are certainly
coming out and saying what they think - and they're mostly not on your
side in this discussion because they understand the market better than
you do.
--
Sean A Corfield -- (904) 302-SEAN
An Architect's View -- http://corfield.org/
"If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive."
-- Margaret Atwood
Author: Dinner
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284966
...
> I hope folks forgive me for my language above but I'm a bit pissed as
> to how I'm being dragged into this.
Dudes, if this is Ray pissed, I'm like, "what's enraged look like?"
:-) You're a good man, Ray. Thanks for your contributions, y wotnot.
Author: Robert Harrison
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284964
> Its sad to see any developer give up on CF but it sounds that by you
saying...
I just want to get Adobe to drop the price. It's a hard sell to some clients
and we've lost some opportunities because of it. I'll always continue to use
CF as my mainstay, but also learning .net is not a bad thing... And whenever
we have lost a site it's always been to .net technology.
For what it's worth I've always been, and still am a CF advocate. But the
reality is it's a business market and it's doesn't hurt to have alternative
options to give your clients.
Robert B. Harrison
Director of Interactive services
Austin & Williams
125 Kennedy Drive, Suite 100 Hauppauge NY 11788
T : 631.231.6600 Ext. 119
F : 631.434.7022
www.austin-williams.com
Great advertising can't be either/or... It must be &.
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.11.0/927 - Release Date: 7/30/2007
5:02 PM
Author: Dinner
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284962
...
> All I can say is, Thanks Adobe. I just got my company to pay for a series of
> clases for .net and vb.net.
>
> Worked out OK for me. Don't know if it will work out for Adobe when we start
> dumping CF.
Eeeew! dot net? *gags* (nothing wrong with it, just saying)
CF does some nifty stuff, but you can do it all yourself, too. A good bit of
CF is open source Java libs and whatnot- or there's Ruby, which I hear
good stuff about- for those looping and if/then whatnot bits.
Sheesh, aren't there enough .net "don't really know squat" peeps out there?
Do you really want to be counted amongst their number? MS is like the
Micky D's of computers- but I don't think MS training is as good, in general.
And MS would be lucky to have me. But I won't do that, neither.
Feel free, to feel good, and whatnot, but a $$ reason as an excuse to go
M$? That's sorta silly, I
think.
Author: Doug Bezona
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284963
I would love to see the ROI calculation on this decision:
x amount for classes
x amount for time to attend the classes (as an aside, learn C# instead of
vb.net... you will thank me later)
x time to actually get proficient at .NET
x copies of Visual Studio
x time to convert existing CF code
Seems you could buy a lot of copies of CF Enterprise with that.
Now, I'm pretty pragmatic about language selection - CF is not the only, or
always the best, choice, but this type of knee-jerk reaction to a minor
price hike strikes me as a more than a bit over the top.
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Rey Bango
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284958
Robert,
Its sad to see any developer give up on CF but it sounds that by you
saying, "I just got my company to pay for a series of classes for .net
and vb.net", its a decision that you've been mulling for some time. You
just don't wake up one day and arbitrarily say, "I'm going to drop
several thousands of dollars on retooling our staff".
Rey...
Robert Harrison wrote:
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Tony
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284956
any idea when those of us with the upgrade subscription thingie
can expect our copies to show up?
thanks
tony :)
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Charles E. Heizer1
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284954
The .Net development not only creates the web service but it also creates WSDL
and a Test page to test the web service. Which is really slick compared to what
CF produces. I've also found the web service code generated by CF does not
include the proper header info, which has caused some application developers a
headache consuming some of the web services.
On 7/30/07 6:06 PM, "James Holmes" <james.holmes@gmail.com> wrote:
>I just recently started playing with Visual Studio .Net, and it's far
easier to write web services and create great web content.
How is the .NET code for a webservice easier than writing access="remote"?
--
mxAjax / CFAjax docs and other useful articles:
http://www.bifrost.com.au/blog/
Author: Bill Betournay
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284953
That made my day. LOL
Thanks
Bill
>> That sure sounds cool.
>> What is it?
>
>www.justfuckinggoogleit.com
LMAO!!!
Author: Charles E. Heizer1
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284952
Thanks,
I look at it from a support contract side as well, I'm not sure but I would have
to go back and check to make sure the Oracle JDBC driver is a "Adobe" supported
model in the Standard edition when buying the support agreement.
Trust me, I really don't want to jump ship but when people keep whispering
PHP/ASP etc. to management, and the product cost is, well free. It makes it a
really hard sell. We have also had,in the past a really hard time finding good
quality CF developers. Which management also takes as a sign that CF is not worth
the effort.
Charles
On 7/30/07 3:53 PM, "John Mason" <mason@fusionlink.com> wrote:
You can use the Oracle j2ee drivers (that comes with Oracle) to work with CF
standard. Just a little more work on your end, but it works fine.
This is for Oracle 10g, it may be slightly different for other versions..
-Find the ojdbc14.jar driver on your oracle installation -Put that jar into
your WEB-INF\lib -In coldfusion, create a new datasource and choose "other"
as the driver
-JDBC URL would be jdbc:oracle:thin:@ip:port:database
-Driver Class oracle.jdbc.OracleDriver
Now why does CF standard not just go ahead and do this for you. Well franky
I don't know, but it really doesn't matter if you have the drivers anyway.
It does confuse the hack out of people, which is bad. Wanted to make sure
you knew this before you decided to jump ship :)
John
mason@fusionlink.com
770.337.8363
http://www.FusionLink.com - ColdFusion and Flex hosting
Now offering ColdFusion 8 Enterprise hosting
FREE Subversion hosting
So, I have to agree with Dale... Adobe has put a bullet in CF. For example,
Standard Edition would be fine for me but I need Oracle access and now I
need to pay twice that just to do supported Oracle connectivity. We are an
enterprise and when I discussed this with management they came back and said
we should just invest our time in ASP.NET. We can retrain our developers,
and not worry about buying upgrades and we'll get new features as they come
out. You know, I don't disagree with them. I just recently started playing
with Visual Studio .Net, and it's far easier to write web services and
create great web content.
Adobe thanks for the memories, a user/developer since version 4.5.
- Charles
On 7/30/07 5:27 AM, "Adam Haskell" <a.haskell@gmail.com> wrote:
I want to echo what Sean said...I looked at CF8 and thought, "wow finally a
product that I would really label Enterprise." Not to say CF7 wasn't
Enterprise, it had some great features and was a great release, but I think
the monitoring and some of the Administration changes helped make it really
enterprise friendly. Thats not mentioning the performance enhancements,
exchange integration (which currently means nothing to Lotus Shops bleh),
and whole suite of ajax tools that really make CF shine as a UI web layer
for large Java apps.
You have to look at this product and realize enterprise is worthless to you
unless you really need super scalability. Standard has it all, albeit
limited/throttled. Sure cfthread and exchange integration and PDF (?) are
throttled but they are available and until you have 100+ (dare I say
probably more) concurrent users using the exact same functionality
Enterprise means very little. Its like a computer, my Mom doesn't need a
dual core 64bit AMD with 2gig of ram and 256mb dedicate graphics card
running iSCSI to send me pictures and read email (unless she is running
Vista then she might ;) ). Gone are the days where you have to have
enterprise to play with those nifty event gateways. If enterprise looks to
expensive to you then you probably don't need it, or you need to look at
some other Enterprise software costs and revisit in 15 minutes. Hell I say
that single move by Adobe to offer a more complete Standard Edition will
open more doors for ColdFusion than any single feature. I say Bravo!
Adam Haskell
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Casey C Cook
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284949
"working w/the government here, i hear a lot of really dumb ideas."
Where are my tax dollars going.
Thanks,
CC
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is a PRIVATE message. If you are not the intended recipient, please
delete without copying and kindly advise us by e-mail of the mistake in
delivery. NOTE: Regardless of content, this e-mail shall not operate to
bind CSC to any order or other contract unless pursuant to explicit
written agreement or government initiative expressly permitting the use of
e-mail for such purpose.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Hastings <paul@sustainableGIS.com>
07/30/2007 08:36 PM
Please respond to
cf-talk@houseoffusion.com
To
CF-Talk <cf-talk@houseoffusion.com>
cc
Subject
Re: Adobe Nails ColdFusion Cofin
Charles E. Heizer1 wrote:
> to pay twice that just to do supported Oracle connectivity. We are an
> enterprise and when I discussed this with management they came back and
said
> we should just invest our time in ASP.NET. We can retrain our
developers, and
> not worry about buying upgrades and we'll get new features as they come
out.
your "enterprise" shop will pay to re-train developers but not an extra
$2000
for their app server? geez, that's the stupidest thing i've heard in a
long
while and working w/the government here, i hear a lot of really dumb
ideas.
Author: Ben Forta
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284948
And I've not weighed in because frankly, there is little for me to add. Like
all of you, I have opinions about pricing, but I am not the final decision
maker - I do voice my opinions, and sometimes they align with those of the
wider CF team and sometimes not, but once a decision is made I have to live
with it. If you are expecting me to denounce a product decision in public
(and no, I am not saying that I would denounce this one) then think again,
that would be more than inappropriate.
And to be very fair, I was asked many times about possible pricing increases
over the past 1/2 year, including at many of the usergroups we visited. And
my answer every time was that A) we've not raised the price in a while,
there has been pressure to do so, and so it was a possibility, B) *if* there
would be price increases we would try to limit the users impacted by it, C)
if there would be a price increase then it would be an incremental one, and
the price would not increase by several times, D) buy subscriptions now and
you'll not have to deal with this if the price does in fact increase. And I
think that my responses were indeed correct.
And finally, we've been debating price increases for several versions
already. And with each edition we debated the issue for a long time and
decided to postpone any increase. Now, after 5 years or so, we have indeed
increased the price of Enterprise only, while simultaneously making Standard
a more compelling option for even more users. But, others have explained
this already.
Beyond this I have nothing else to say on the topic, at this point I am too
busy with features and customers.
--- Ben
Let me be absolutely clear on something Dale.
1) I have nothing to do with the prices Adobe charge. Last time I
checked, I don't work for Adobe. If Adobe wants to hire me, they can
give me a call, but until then, I don't see how you can put this on
me. What the hell did I do?
2) I've been spending my time blogging about features. I figure my
readers care more about that. I haven't been avoiding pricing. I've
just been focused on what interests ME and what I assume interests my
readers. If you want to know what I think about the prices, then ask.
But to act like I'm some kind of conspiracy with Adobe to make people
not notice the prices is flat out wrong.
3) I have NEVER refrained from speaking my mind about CF. Now I'll be
honest and say I've rarely complained. That isn't to say I haven't.
Shoot, I bad mouth CFLOGON all the time, and I freely share WHY it
bugs me.
I hope folks forgive me for my language above but I'm a bit pissed as
to how I'm being dragged into this.
> What's the deal with people who think that you should be happy to pay more
> because there are new features.
>
> That makes no sense what so ever. If there were no new features, then you
> wouldn't need a new version. It's the quantity and quality of new features
> that makes people decide if they are even going to upgrade. The fact that
> it's an upgrade means they get your money again, so there is no need to
get
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Robert Harrison
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284946
> What's the deal with people who think that you should be happy to pay
> more because there are new features.
All I can say is, Thanks Adobe. I just got my company to pay for a series of
clases for .net and vb.net.
Worked out OK for me. Don't know if it will work out for Adobe when we start
dumping CF.
Robert B. Harrison
Director of Interactive services
Austin & Williams
125 Kennedy Drive, Suite 100 Hauppauge NY 11788
T : 631.231.6600 Ext. 119
F : 631.434.7022
www.austin-williams.com
Great advertising can't be either/or... It must be &.
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.11.0/927 - Release Date: 7/30/2007
5:02 PM
Author: Carlos Paez Jr
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284944
At my group in Motorola we have 5 CF enterprise licenses. We don't pay for
upgrades, instead we pay ~1500 per license in maintenance and it lasts for 2
years.
And yes, $7,500 is nothing to an enterprise company.
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: John Mason
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284941
Dale, I did a quick search for software pricing to put the CF8 pricing in
some perspective..
Windows 2003 Enterprise 3,443
Windows 2003 Standard 958
Oracle 10g Enterprise 40,000
Oracle 10g Standard 4,995
Sql Server Enterprise 13,699
Sql Server Standard 1,754
JBoss Enterprise 4,500
Now as far as software goes, CF8 is reasonably priced. If you look at just
J2ee servers or Web app servers, yea CF8 Ent is very high. Yes, this will
hurt their sales. It's simply a point for you to determine if the features
are worth it for you or not. I'm sure BlueDragon and the others will
incorporate a lot of those same features down the road just like Adobe
adopted cfthread from BlueDragon. So no biggie, wait 6 months..
Another point for the Adobe people, I remember when the standard/enterprise
started and there was a lot complaining back then. With the price gap
getting wider, maybe it's time for a third version, let's call it a
"Business" version. That provides some of the least costly new features and
provides a bridge (or stepping stone) from standard to enterprise. I think
that would solve a lot of issues with this and take almost nothing for Adobe
to do.
John Mason
mason@fusionlink.com
770.337.8363
www.FusionLink.com - ColdFusion and Flex hosting
Now offering ColdFusion 8 Enterprise hosting
FREE Subversion hosting
Author: Raymond Camden
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284939
Let me be absolutely clear on something Dale.
1) I have nothing to do with the prices Adobe charge. Last time I
checked, I don't work for Adobe. If Adobe wants to hire me, they can
give me a call, but until then, I don't see how you can put this on
me. What the hell did I do?
2) I've been spending my time blogging about features. I figure my
readers care more about that. I haven't been avoiding pricing. I've
just been focused on what interests ME and what I assume interests my
readers. If you want to know what I think about the prices, then ask.
But to act like I'm some kind of conspiracy with Adobe to make people
not notice the prices is flat out wrong.
3) I have NEVER refrained from speaking my mind about CF. Now I'll be
honest and say I've rarely complained. That isn't to say I haven't.
Shoot, I bad mouth CFLOGON all the time, and I freely share WHY it
bugs me.
I hope folks forgive me for my language above but I'm a bit pissed as
to how I'm being dragged into this.
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Brian Kotek
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284938
The bottom line is that if the extra $1500 breaks you and stops you from
buying CF8 Enterprise, you were not a target customer for CF8 Enterprise.
The vast majority of customers buying the Enterprise version will turn
around and buy CF8 Enterprise because $1500 is nothing in an IT budget. For
people who can't afford $7500, there is the Standard version.
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Rey Bango
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284936
Dale,
Most people know me as being VERY vocal when I don't like something.
Quite honestly, I don't see an issue with a price increase in the
"Enterprise" edition. Its targeted to a different level of customer who
won't balk at that price. Having worked with companies at that level, I
know for fact that $7k is peanuts to them. Now, if standard would've had
a substantial price increase then I'd be more inclined to gripe about it.
So I don't believe anyone is "hiding in a hole". They might just be
looking at this from a different perspective than you.
Rey...
Dale Fraser wrote:
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Brad Wood
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284934
Lol. Thanks's for the insult.
I purposely asked on the list because:
1) It was a thread that actually technical for once
2) I figured other people could benefit from the answer
3) I wanted to know how Brian was using it in the context of CF, which
Google probably won't tell me.
Kind of like when you ask a question in the class for the benefit of
everyone else as much as yourself. Heck, we could just shut this list
down, and forward all houseoffusion traffic to
www.justfriggingoogleit.com but that would sort of defeat the community,
wouldn't it?
~Brad
> That sure sounds cool.
> What is it?
www.justfuckinggoogleit.com
http://www.google.com/search?q=fips+140
Author: Sean Corfield
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284932
> What's the deal with people who think that you should be happy to pay more
> because there are new features.
I think you're completely missing the point: there are many companies
out there that view CFMX 7 as "too cheap" at $3k/CPU. They don't think
it is serious software so they won't buy it. The increased price
actually helps sell to those enterprise companies. And the (frankly)
small price hike won't put other enterprises off.
If you think enterprise is too expensive, you simply aren't an
enterprise company!
Hardly any enterprise software costs less than $6k/CPU. Go look at
WebLogic and WebSphere (or almost anything from IBM!). Go look at
Oracle.
Someone pointed at the DataDirect drivers which cost $4k retail -
included in CF Enterprise.
> That makes no sense what so ever.
It makes perfect sense - if you understand the enterprise market.
> People are too scared to say what they think
> and risk tainting their perfect CF image.
No, this thread has 60+ responses already so folks are certainly
coming out and saying what they think - and they're mostly not on your
side in this discussion because they understand the market better than
you do.
--
Sean A Corfield -- (904) 302-SEAN
An Architect's View -- http://corfield.org/
"If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive."
-- Margaret Atwood
Author: Sean Corfield
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284931
> Ok, my forth attempt to post this. Jeez, the list server was down for two
> attempts and then I got 2 bounces saying my message is over 100 lines.
No, we got all four of your messages. The warning about being over 100
lines is just a warning - because you didn't trim quotes in your
reply.
--
Sean A Corfield -- (904) 302-SEAN
An Architect's View -- http://corfield.org/
"If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive."
-- Margaret Atwood
Author: Rick Root
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284930
> >> We use it at here at ATCC. But given this price increase we'll
> probably be moving over to Blue Dragon.
Now *THAT* is perfectly reasonable.
As long as you keep in mind that you're giving up a lot of features
that Adobe Coldfusion offers that Bluedragon does not currently offer,
like flash remoting, event gateways, cfreport, flash forms,
cfexchange, cfpresentation,
Rick
Author: Sean Corfield
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284929
> We use it at here at ATCC. But given this price increase we'll probably be
moving over to Blue Dragon.
Which would leave you without many of the real enterprise features: MS
Exchange Integration, SMS/IM/JMS event gateways, high-performance
report generation, high-performance PDF processing and
high-performance email service, integrated server monitoring and
self-healing, multi-user security for administrator and RDS.
I'd be curious to know what Enterprise Edition features you currently
use? Just the multi-server install setup perhaps?
--
Sean A Corfield -- (904) 302-SEAN
An Architect's View -- http://corfield.org/
"If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive."
-- Margaret
Atwood
Author: Bader, Terrence C CTR MARMC, 231
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284928
Can you say upgrade pricing....
~Terry
What's the deal with people who think that you should be happy to pay
more because there are new features.
That makes no sense what so ever. If there were no new features, then
you wouldn't need a new version. It's the quantity and quality of new
features that makes people decide if they are even going to upgrade. The
fact that it's an upgrade means they get your money again, so there is
no need to get your money again + a premium for new features.
If all the ColdFusion die hard's who go hide in a hole and don't speak
up when something like this stupid pricing happens then these problems
are never going to get addressed. People are too scared to say what they
think and risk tainting their perfect CF image.
I note that Ben & Ray have had nothing to say about the increased
pricing, in fact they just kinda did a soft release and hope that it
would sweep under the carpet, and no one would notice. Very Poor!
Regards
Dale Fraser
http://dalefraser.blogspot.com
Author: Rick Root
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284927
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
This also assumes that you're the only developer, you're only taking
one year into consideration, and you're assuming that you get no other
benefits from using coldfusion that you might have to pay extra for
with PHP - or spend a LOT more time implementing - over and above the
10% productivity difference.
For example, PDF generation, enterprise reporting, verity collections.
Rick
Author: James Holmes
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284926
Agreed - Enterprise was our first choice. CF cost nothing compared to
the SPARC servers on which we run it, and don't even ask what Oracle
(and its SPARC hardware) costs.
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
--
mxAjax / CFAjax docs and other useful articles:
http://www.bifrost.com.au/blog/
Author: Rick Root
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284925
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
No doubt about that! DB2 drivers are REALLY REALLY expensive. IBM
wanted to charge us like $30k for "DB2/Connect" to give us the JDBC
drivers direct from IBM.
If you use free drivers, you get no support from Adobe. Or anyone.
At least with CF Enterprise using the included drivers, you get
support from Adobe if you need it.
Rick
Author: Dawson, Michael
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284922
>> We use it at here at ATCC. But given this price increase we'll
probably be moving over to Blue Dragon.
>These discussions simply remind me of the "user blackmail" that we get
with CFEclipse: "If you dont add this feature, we are moving to
homesite!"
I like it when irrational people move away from CF. It makes the rest
of us more-valuable.
M!ke
Author: Phillip M. Vector
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284920
<sarcasm>
That's true.
Look how many people complain about todays cars costing more then the
model-t.
</sarcasm>
Expecting new features without a price increase is not an intelligent
way of doing business. If you don't like the increase (and you NEED
enterprise), then either work out a solution so you don't need it or go
install something else and learn that.
Dale Fraser wrote:
> What's the deal with people who think that you should be happy to pay more
> because there are new features.
Author: Rey Bango
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284917
I couldn't have said it better myself Dave.
Rey
Dave Watts wrote:
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Cutter (CFRelated)
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284916
Actually, Ben spoke a little about the value add in the latest podcast
at coldfusionweekly.com, albeit in an indirect manner. Aside from the
fact that CF hasn't had a price increase since CF5, or that this is
probably the largest new-feature release in the history of the product,
or the fact that no other server gives you this much pertinent
development ROI out of the box, there is also the point that the biggest
un-marked feature is a major upgrade in the speed and performance of the
server. Why is this important? Because it lowers your overhead costs in
other areas, like additional equipment and licensing to support it.
Adobe has to pay developers, marketing staff, advertising costs, etc. If
CF were an open source project it might be different, but I don't think
you'd see the advancements to the product like you have throughout CF
history. If you care to argue that point then maybe you'd like to ask
Mark Drew how much help he gets writing features into CFEclipse, or the
guys at the Smith Project about how much help outside developers are
giving them? Mark is a wonderful freak of nature, who must code in his
sleep to keep up with the demands of this community, and the folks at
the Smith project will still be years before they fully catch up to what
CF 7 can do, much less 8.
I agree with Rey. If you're having that much trouble convincing a
potential client of the value of developing on CF then they are probably
more trouble than they are worth. Small projects won't warrant
Enterprise Edition. Large projects will see the ROI to make the
purchase, especially if you show them the facts and they have enough
sense to run the numbers. Hosting providers are popping up left and
right to accommodate, and Adobe's pricing plan for them, coupled with
their licensing structure on VPS's and procs, will make CF an extremely
viable option compared to the past.
BTW, I've written the Exchange connector code in ASP before. Ben's
little 45 line sample app, from his UG demos, would take ASP scripting
three times the length of my arm. That's ROI. Please, give it a rest. If
you're so upset about it then move on to the "next big thing," and let
the rest of us enjoy what the future has to give us.
Steve "Cutter" Blades
Adobe Certified Professional
Advanced Macromedia ColdFusion MX 7 Developer
_____________________________
http://blog.cutterscrossing.com
Dale Fraser wrote:
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Dave Watts
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284915
> What's the deal with people who think that you should be
> happy to pay more because there are new features.
No one said anything about being happy. You should, however, expect to pay
more because there are new features, just like you do with every other
product in existence.
> If all the ColdFusion die hard's who go hide in a hole and
> don't speak up when something like this stupid pricing
> happens then these problems are never going to get addressed.
> People are too scared to say what they think and risk
> tainting their perfect CF image.
I think you're reading a whole lot into nothing. Personally, I don't think
the pricing is a problem. If I did, then I'd agree with you. Either it's
worth the price to you, or it isn't. I do notice it's a whole lot cheaper
than Oracle or SQL Server database servers.
These "problems", like any other market issues, will be decided by the
market. I suspect that the market of enterprise buyers will not be put off
by the price increase of CF Enterprise.
Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software
http://www.figleaf.com/
Fig Leaf Software provides the highest caliber vendor-authorized
instruction at our training centers in Washington DC, Atlanta,
Chicago, Baltimore, Northern Virginia, or on-site at your location.
Visit http://training.figleaf.com/ for more information!
This email has been processed by SmoothZap - www.smoothwall.net
Author: Dave Watts
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284911
> Unless the Oracle supplied driver has changed recently, some
> things don't work the same as the DataDirect CF Oracle
> driver, like stored procs returning results from ref cursors
> and BLOBS. If it has changed, great.
So, then, if you need Enterprise features, you buy Enterprise. Or, you can
just go buy DataDirect Connect for JDBC yourself, and pay ~$5K.
Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software
http://www.figleaf.com/
Fig Leaf Software provides the highest caliber vendor-authorized
instruction at our training centers in Washington DC, Atlanta,
Chicago, Baltimore, Northern Virginia, or on-site at your location.
Visit http://training.figleaf.com/ for more information!
This email has been processed by SmoothZap - www.smoothwall.net
Author: Billy Cox
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284910
I tend to be skeptical of earth-shattering predictions coming from someone
who can't spell 'coffin'. :)
I don't get this at all. People are flipping out about Enterprise going up
in cost. How many people run Enterprise?! The standard version stays the
same and gets a huge bump in features. The people complaining are talking
like they raised the price of both versions. CF standard is a STEAL at
$1299, especially with what they have added.
To people who need extremely high performance (server monitoring, unlimited
cfthread, etc.), multiple instances, gov't approved encryption, and all the
rest, $7,500 is nothing for an enterprise application server that does
everything CF does as easily as CF does it.
For goodness sake people, take a deep breath and stop freaking out.
Author: Casey Dougall
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284909
Small point to bear in mind here, which always pops into my head when I hear
this argument.
Let's say I am on $50/hr like you say, therefore for myself to pay for CF8
Ent, I'm looking at working at least 150 hours before it's paid for. OK, I
may be 10% more productive than PHP, but if I were using CF then I would
only save 208 hours per year over PHP (150 are spent paying for the license
as well).
So, at the end of my year, I'm 58 profit hours up. i.e $2900. If I had more
than one server (say one dev, one test), I'd be out of pocket to the tune of
$4600. It's not such a massive amount after all.
~~~
Neil
You think about this all wrong, you should be charging your clients for
hosting, then it's not out of pocket at all. you might take a slight larger
hit for upgrading but in the end your clients flip the bill for hosting
their websites with you. You would never need to work a minute to make up
for the price of coldfusion.
Casey
Author: Dale Fraser
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284906
What's the deal with people who think that you should be happy to pay more
because there are new features.
That makes no sense what so ever. If there were no new features, then you
wouldn't need a new version. It's the quantity and quality of new features
that makes people decide if they are even going to upgrade. The fact that
it's an upgrade means they get your money again, so there is no need to get
your money again + a premium for new features.
If all the ColdFusion die hard's who go hide in a hole and don't speak up
when something like this stupid pricing happens then these problems are
never going to get addressed. People are too scared to say what they think
and risk tainting their perfect CF image.
I note that Ben & Ray have had nothing to say about the increased pricing,
in fact they just kinda did a soft release and hope that it would sweep
under the carpet, and no one would notice. Very Poor!
Regards
Dale Fraser
http://dalefraser.blogspot.com
Author: Doug Bezona
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284905
> Charles,
>
> Why not just use Standard, and use the free JDBC drivers you can
> download from Oracle themselves, and just make an 'other' connection?
Or, you can buy the DataDirect Oracle driver yourself:
http://www.programmers.com/ppi_us/Product.aspx?sku=DB1%20017X
Of course, once you see what it costs retail, you may rethink CF Enterprise
being "expensive"....
Author: Mark Drew
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284901
Larry
Why move at all? I mean, the reason you would upgrade is to get
features you dont currently have. Saying you will move to another
engine which .. err.. last time I looked, didnt have those features,
well, go for it!
Some of these arguments are really dumb. Dont upgrade if you cant afford it.
There will be plenty of hosts out there providing CF8 hosting very
shortly, use those if you need to or make it part of your fee for a
project.
> We use it at here at ATCC. But given this price increase we'll probably be
moving over to Blue Dragon.
These discussions simply remind me of the "user blackmail" that we get
with CFEclipse: "If you dont add this feature, we are moving to
homesite!"
MD
Author: Andy Allan
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284899
Go write your own integration with Exchange and evaluate those man hours ...
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: James Holmes
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284897
Unless the Oracle supplied driver has changed recently, some things
don't work the same as the DataDirect CF Oracle driver, like stored
procs returning results from ref cursors and BLOBS. If it has changed,
great.
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Will Tomlinson
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284892
>> That sure sounds cool.
>> What is it?
>
>www.justfuckinggoogleit.com
LMAO!!!
Author: Rey Bango
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284888
Hi Dale,
> I have to agree that I have never had issues selling the benefits of CF and
> ROI, it's actually an easy sell.
Exactly! :)
Rey...
Author: Rey Bango
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284887
Again, we'll disagree.
If a client is not willing to spend the money it takes to build their
site the right way, then to me, its not worth wasting my time on them.
And to date, I've been "ridiculously" successful by doing just that.
Just as my clients are selective about whom they choose, I'm selective
about the clients that I work with.
Rey...
Andy Matthews wrote:
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: John Mason
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284886
I wasn't the presenter at that CFUnited, but here's my CFDJ article talking
about JVM tuning which uses several of the free tools from Sun which I also
presented at the CFUnited Express in Atlanta this past spring.
http://labs.fusionlink.com/katapult/index.cfm?page=articles/jvmtuning
John Mason
mason@fusionlink.com
770.337.8363
www.FusionLink.com - ColdFusion and Flex hosting
Now offering ColdFusion 8 Enterprise hosting
FREE Subversion hosting
"which generally you can find free tools to analyze. Someone had a fairly
good presentation 2 years ago at cfUnited about using some of these free
tools, I think he published a low cost PDF too.
Adam Haskell"
Author: John Mason
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284885
Ok, my forth attempt to post this. Jeez, the list server was down for two
attempts and then I got 2 bounces saying my message is over 100 lines.
Hopefully this one will get through. This is in reply to Charles talking
about needing CF Ent for the Oracle connectivity.
You can use the Oracle j2ee drivers (that comes with Oracle) to work with CF
standard. Just a little more work on your end, but it works fine.
This is for Oracle 10g, it may be slightly different for other versions..
-Find the ojdbc14.jar driver on your oracle installation -Put that jar into
your WEB-INF\lib -In coldfusion, create a new datasource and choose "other"
as the driver
-JDBC URL would be jdbc:oracle:thin:@ip:port:database
-Driver Class oracle.jdbc.OracleDriver
Now why does CF standard not just go ahead and do this for you. Well franky
I don't know, but it really doesn't matter if you have the drivers anyway.
It does confuse the hack out of people, which is bad. Wanted to make sure
you knew this before you decided to jump ship :)
John Mason
mason@fusionlink.com
770.337.8363
www.FusionLink.com - ColdFusion and Flex hosting
Now offering ColdFusion 8 Enterprise hosting
FREE Subversion hosting
Author: Paul Hastings
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284884
Charles E. Heizer1 wrote:
> to pay twice that just to do supported Oracle connectivity. We are an
> enterprise and when I discussed this with management they came back and said
> we should just invest our time in ASP.NET. We can retrain our developers,
and
> not worry about buying upgrades and we'll get new features as they come out.
your "enterprise" shop will pay to re-train developers but not an extra $2000
for their app server? geez, that's the stupidest thing i've heard in a long
while and working w/the government here, i hear a lot of really dumb
ideas.
Author: John Mason
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284882
You can use the Oracle j2ee drivers (that comes with Oracle) to work with CF
standard. Just a little more work on your end, but it works fine.
This is for Oracle 10g, it may be slightly different for other versions..
-Find the ojdbc14.jar driver on your oracle installation
-Put that jar into your WEB-INF\lib -In coldfusion, create a new datasource
and choose "other" as the driver
-JDBC URL would be jdbc:oracle:thin:@ip:port:database
-Driver Class oracle.jdbc.OracleDriver
Now why does CF standard not just go ahead and do this for you. Well franky
I don't know, but it really doesn't matter if you have the drivers anyway.
It does confuse the hack out of people, which is bad. Wanted to make sure
you knew this before you decided to jump ship :)
John Mason
mason@fusionlink.com
770.337.8363
www.FusionLink.com - ColdFusion and Flex hosting
Now offering ColdFusion 8 Enterprise hosting
FREE Subversion hosting
So, I have to agree with Dale... Adobe has put a bullet in CF. For example,
Standard Edition would be fine for me but I need Oracle access and now I
need to pay twice that just to do supported Oracle connectivity. We are an
enterprise and when I discussed this with management they came back and said
we should just invest our time in ASP.NET. We can retrain our developers,
and not worry about buying upgrades and we'll get new features as they come
out. You know, I don't disagree with them. I just recently started playing
with Visual Studio .Net, and it's far easier to write web services and
create great web content.
Adobe thanks for the memories, a user/developer since version 4.5.
- Charles
Author: Matthew Williams
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284881
Mark Mandel wrote:
> Charles,
>
> Why not just use Standard, and use the free JDBC drivers you can
> download from Oracle themselves, and just make an 'other' connection?
>
> What's the problem with that?
No ref_cursor support. That's only provided with the enterprise drivers
built in to CF. Just to name one ;).
Matthew Williams
Geodesic GraFX
www.geodesicgrafx.com/blog
Author: Larry Lyons
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284879
>Dale,
>I'd suggest posting the content of your blog here rather than just the url.
>As for your post on CF 8 being a dead product because of the price
>increase, note that the increase if for Enterprise. How many people
>here (other than me) actually use or need enterprise.
>
We use it at here at ATCC. But given this price increase we'll probably be moving
over to Blue Dragon.
Author: Dave Watts
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284878
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Most people buying Enterprise are not doing so to support the output of a
single developer.
Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software
http://www.figleaf.com/
Fig Leaf Software provides the highest caliber vendor-authorized
instruction at our training centers in Washington DC, Atlanta,
Chicago, Baltimore, Northern Virginia, or on-site at your location.
Visit http://training.figleaf.com/ for more information!
This email has been processed by SmoothZap - www.smoothwall.net
Author: James Holmes
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284877
>I just recently started playing with Visual Studio .Net, and it's far
easier to write web services and create great web content.
How is the .NET code for a webservice easier than writing access="remote"?
--
mxAjax / CFAjax docs and other useful articles:
http://www.bifrost.com.au/blog/
Author: Dave Watts
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284874
> Just because a client doesn't want to drop 1/4 or 1/5 oif
> their budget on an application server doesn't mean that
> they're not worth doing business with.
If doing so would save them money in the long run, and if this is something
they could easily discover by, oh, doing their job and calculating ROI, then
they're not worth doing business with. It's not worth doing business with
people who can't discern value, because they won't be able to discern your
true value either.
Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software
http://www.figleaf.com/
Fig Leaf Software provides the highest caliber vendor-authorized
instruction at our training centers in Washington DC, Atlanta,
Chicago, Baltimore, Northern Virginia, or on-site at your location.
Visit http://training.figleaf.com/ for more information!
This email has been processed by SmoothZap - www.smoothwall.net
Author: Mark Mandel
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284873
John,
From what I know (or remember) of the legalities of it all - it is
actually rather expensive for CF to ship with a driver, as there are a
slew of licensing costs. This was one of the reasons it took so long
to get postGres and mySQL5 drivers with CF.
But there has never, ever been any issue with you adding them in
yourself, as then the licence isn't bound to the CF product.
Annoying, I know, but that's just how the cookie crumbles.
Mark
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Bryan Stevenson
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284872
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
hear hear!! some folks need to get over themselves....pretty sad life when all
you look forward to is blogging about how you think others decisions are bad
IMHO
stupid stupid trolls!
Cheers
Bryan Stevenson B.Comm.
VP & Director of E-Commerce Development
Electric Edge Systems Group Inc.
phone: 250.480.0642
fax: 250.480.1264
cell: 250.920.8830
e-mail: bryan@electricedgesystems.com
web: www.electricedgesystems.com
Notice:
This message, including any attachments, is confidential and may contain
information that is privileged or exempt from disclosure. It is intended
only for the person to whom it is addressed unless expressly authorized
otherwise by the sender. If you are not an authorized recipient, please
notify the sender immediately and permanently destroy all copies of this
message and attachments.
Author: Dale Fraser
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284871
I have to agree that I have never had issues selling the benefits of CF and
ROI, it's actually an easy sell.
I just purely don't understand the price hike, in a market where software is
becoming less expensive and also free, a 25% increase is unjustified unless
there is some new feature that they have included that requires them to
licence in third party products.
Why this has added a Nail to the Coffin is because they have hurt the
enterprise market, if I want to develop a large enterprise scale
application, which requires multiple servers etc, etc. ColdFusion is simply
too expensive and I will use something else.
Instead of buying Enterprise I will now (have already) buy Standard.
PS: If someone would like to explain to me the price difference between
download and boxed, i'd love to hear that story also. In Australia here an
Enterprise box is only $1,104, it must be really shiny.
Regards
Dale Fraser
http://dalefraser.blogspot.com
I completely disagree with this statement Andy. Part of being a
consultant is selling your solution and if a person can't effectively do
that, then they shouldn't be in the consulting business at all.
What I've seen over the time I've been involved with ColdFusion is less
people that are interested or willing to sell a solution as opposed to
making their $30-50/hr as a contractor. If thats what person wants to
do, then they might be better of choosing a tool like PHP or .Net. But
in my experience, selling customers on ColdFusion, even when I've had to
explain the ROI, has not been an issue. I really believe people
underestimate the intelligence of prospects and thats just not good
business.
Rey...
Andy Matthews wrote:
> Rick...
>
> You make compelling arguments. But IMO, if you have to explain the ROI to
> someone, then you've already lost the battle....
Author: Neil Middleton
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284870
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Small point to bear in mind here, which always pops into my head when I hear this
argument.
Let's say I am on $50/hr like you say, therefore for myself to pay for CF8 Ent,
I'm looking at working at least 150 hours before it's paid for. OK, I may be 10%
more productive than PHP, but if I were using CF then I would only save 208 hours
per year over PHP (150 are spent paying for the license as well).
So, at the end of my year, I'm 58 profit hours up. i.e $2900. If I had more than
one server (say one dev, one test), I'd be out of pocket to the tune of $4600.
It's not such a massive amount after all.
Neil
Author: Dinner
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284868
...
> CF 8 (either standard or enterprise) is, unfortunately too expensive for me
> personally - but the price is far from unreasonable when you look at the
> universe of options.
Ha! If you have a "personal" enterprise app, guess you're set.
Get coding you monkeys! Make that 7.5 Gs look cheap.
Heh- with railo, and smith, and BD and whatnot- there are options.
For a certain type of app... otherwise, lookout RAD (ruby, etc.).
PS- I like cheese and crackers. If something isn't thread safe, it should
go in the request scope?
__
[pop]
Author: Mark Mandel
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284865
Charles,
Why not just use Standard, and use the free JDBC drivers you can
download from Oracle themselves, and just make an 'other' connection?
What's the problem with that?
I hate to say this, I have to wonder - if your business is complaining
about paying ~10K for their server software, (or less), then you
probably struggle to qualify for the 'enterprise' target that
ColdFusion really is targeted for. (and most of us aren't, we're just
paying for upgrades).
Maybe I'm too far removed from the bean counters (and that is quite
possible), but I actually am quite confused by all of this noise.
I'm actually sitting back and looking at all the new features that
were put in Standard, which is meant for people who aren't enterprise,
and going 'cool! loads of new stuff, without a price hike... nice work
for targeting those that aren't enterprise, and essentially giving
them more for less cost in a product'.
Mark
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: John Mason
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284863
You can use the Oracle j2ee drivers (that comes with Oracle) to work with CF
standard. Just a little more work on your end, but it works fine.
This is for Oracle 10g, it may be slightly different for other versions..
-Find the ojdbc14.jar driver on your oracle installation -Put that jar into
your WEB-INF\lib -In coldfusion, create a new datasource and choose "other"
as the driver
-JDBC URL would be jdbc:oracle:thin:@ip:port:database
-Driver Class oracle.jdbc.OracleDriver
Now why does CF standard not just go ahead and do this for you. Well franky
I don't know, but it really doesn't matter if you have the drivers anyway.
It does confuse the hack out of people, which is bad. Wanted to make sure
you knew this before you decided to jump ship :)
John
mason@fusionlink.com
770.337.8363
http://www.FusionLink.com - ColdFusion and Flex hosting
Now offering ColdFusion 8 Enterprise hosting
FREE Subversion hosting
So, I have to agree with Dale... Adobe has put a bullet in CF. For example,
Standard Edition would be fine for me but I need Oracle access and now I
need to pay twice that just to do supported Oracle connectivity. We are an
enterprise and when I discussed this with management they came back and said
we should just invest our time in ASP.NET. We can retrain our developers,
and not worry about buying upgrades and we'll get new features as they come
out. You know, I don't disagree with them. I just recently started playing
with Visual Studio .Net, and it's far easier to write web services and
create great web content.
Adobe thanks for the memories, a user/developer since version 4.5.
- Charles
On 7/30/07 5:27 AM, "Adam Haskell" <a.haskell@gmail.com> wrote:
I want to echo what Sean said...I looked at CF8 and thought, "wow finally a
product that I would really label Enterprise." Not to say CF7 wasn't
Enterprise, it had some great features and was a great release, but I think
the monitoring and some of the Administration changes helped make it really
enterprise friendly. Thats not mentioning the performance enhancements,
exchange integration (which currently means nothing to Lotus Shops bleh),
and whole suite of ajax tools that really make CF shine as a UI web layer
for large Java apps.
You have to look at this product and realize enterprise is worthless to you
unless you really need super scalability. Standard has it all, albeit
limited/throttled. Sure cfthread and exchange integration and PDF (?) are
throttled but they are available and until you have 100+ (dare I say
probably more) concurrent users using the exact same functionality
Enterprise means very little. Its like a computer, my Mom doesn't need a
dual core 64bit AMD with 2gig of ram and 256mb dedicate graphics card
running iSCSI to send me pictures and read email (unless she is running
Vista then she might ;) ). Gone are the days where you have to have
enterprise to play with those nifty event gateways. If enterprise looks to
expensive to you then you probably don't need it, or you need to look at
some other Enterprise software costs and revisit in 15 minutes. Hell I say
that single move by Adobe to offer a more complete Standard Edition will
open more doors for ColdFusion than any single feature. I say Bravo!
Adam Haskell
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Dave Watts
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284861
> Now why does CF standard not just go ahead and do this for
> you. Well franky I don't know, but it really doesn't matter
> if you have the drivers anyway.
Adobe can't just bundle whatever they like. They bundle DataDirect drivers,
and pay for the privilege. Presumably, that's one reason why Enterprise
costs more than Standard - more DataDirect drivers are included.
> So, I have to agree with Dale... Adobe has put a bullet in
> CF. For example, Standard Edition would be fine for me but I
> need Oracle access and now I need to pay twice that just to
> do supported Oracle connectivity.
Finding out that you can use Oracle's own JDBC drivers shouldn't take more
than a few seconds:
http://www.google.com/search?q=cfmx+standard+oracle+drivers
> We are an enterprise and when I discussed this with management
> they came back and said we should just invest our time in ASP.NET.
> We can retrain our developers, and not worry about buying upgrades
> and we'll get new features as they come out.
What makes you so sure that all new versions of the .NET Framework will run
on your existing Windows servers? They might, they might not.
Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software
http://www.figleaf.com/
Fig Leaf Software provides the highest caliber vendor-authorized
instruction at our training centers in Washington DC, Atlanta,
Chicago, Baltimore, Northern Virginia, or on-site at your location.
Visit http://training.figleaf.com/ for more information!
This email has been processed by SmoothZap - www.smoothwall.net
Author: Jim Davis
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284860
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Or too little.
I still suffer from the "it's not expensive enough to be a REAL enterprise
app" syndrome. The belief is that WebSphere (depending on load out at
upwards of 10 times CF enterprises cost) is a "better" because it's more
expensive.
CF 8 (either standard or enterprise) is, unfortunately too expensive for me
personally - but the price is far from unreasonable when you look at the
universe of options.
Jim Davis
Author: Jim Davis
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284859
> So, I have to agree with Dale... Adobe has put a bullet in CF. For
> example, Standard Edition would be fine for me but I need Oracle access
> and now I need to pay twice that just to do supported Oracle
> connectivity. We are an enterprise and when I discussed this with
You might also just buy Standard and use a third party oracle driver.
I connect quite happily to DB2 with standard using a different driver for
example.
Enterprise comes with high quality drivers for enterprise DBs - but Standard
is not limited to those drivers that ship with it.
Jim Davis
Author: John Mason
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284857
You can use the Oracle j2ee drivers (that comes with Oracle) to work with CF
standard. Just a little more work on your end, but it works fine.
This is for Oracle 10g, it may be slightly different for other versions..
-Find the ojdbc14.jar driver on your oracle installation
-Put that jar into your WEB-INF\lib
-In coldfusion, create a new datasource and choose "other" as the driver
-JDBC URL would be jdbc:oracle:thin:@ip:port:database
-Driver Class oracle.jdbc.OracleDriver
Now why does CF standard not just go ahead and do this for you. Well franky
I don't know, but it really doesn't matter if you have the drivers anyway.
It does confuse the hack out of people, which is bad. Wanted to make sure
you knew this before you decided to jump ship :)
John
mason@fusionlink.com
770.337.8363
www.FusionLink.com - Specializing in ColdFusion and Flex hosting
Now offering ColdFusion 8 Enterprise hosting
FREE Subversion hosting
So, I have to agree with Dale... Adobe has put a bullet in CF. For example,
Standard Edition would be fine for me but I need Oracle access and now I
need to pay twice that just to do supported Oracle connectivity. We are an
enterprise and when I discussed this with management they came back and said
we should just invest our time in ASP.NET. We can retrain our developers,
and not worry about buying upgrades and we'll get new features as they come
out. You know, I don't disagree with them. I just recently started playing
with Visual Studio .Net, and it's far easier to write web services and
create great web content.
Adobe thanks for the memories, a user/developer since version 4.5.
- Charles
On 7/30/07 5:27 AM, "Adam Haskell" <a.haskell@gmail.com> wrote:
I want to echo what Sean said...I looked at CF8 and thought, "wow finally a
product that I would really label Enterprise." Not to say CF7 wasn't
Enterprise, it had some great features and was a great release, but I think
the monitoring and some of the Administration changes helped make it really
enterprise friendly. Thats not mentioning the performance enhancements,
exchange integration (which currently means nothing to Lotus Shops bleh),
and whole suite of ajax tools that really make CF shine as a UI web layer
for large Java apps.
You have to look at this product and realize enterprise is worthless to you
unless you really need super scalability. Standard has it all, albeit
limited/throttled. Sure cfthread and exchange integration and PDF (?) are
throttled but they are available and until you have 100+ (dare I say
probably more) concurrent users using the exact same functionality
Enterprise means very little. Its like a computer, my Mom doesn't need a
dual core 64bit AMD with 2gig of ram and 256mb dedicate graphics card
running iSCSI to send me pictures and read email (unless she is running
Vista then she might ;) ). Gone are the days where you have to have
enterprise to play with those nifty event gateways. If enterprise looks to
expensive to you then you probably don't need it, or you need to look at
some other Enterprise software costs and revisit in 15 minutes. Hell I say
that single move by Adobe to offer a more complete Standard Edition will
open more doors for ColdFusion than any single feature. I say Bravo!
Adam Haskell
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Adam Haskell
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284856
"One more thing about the Server Monitor. It isn't just for use on live
sites. You can very easily use it on your dev server to identify
problems/bottlenecks in your code."
That's an excellent and potentially overlooked (by many) point! SM is
enabled, if I understand correctly, in developer mode. The monitor should
often be used at this stage of development on NOT in production. If you need
it in production FusionReactor or SeeFusion is a great fit if you are not
running Enterprise. If thats even too expensive an alternative to that is
using some of the built in hooks in Java 5 and doing core dumps and what
not, which generally you can find free tools to analyze. Someone had a
fairly good presentation 2 years ago at cfUnited about using some of these
free tools, I think he published a low cost PDF too.
Adam Haskell
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Andy Matthews
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284854
That's a ridiculous statement Rey...
Just because a client doesn't want to drop 1/4 or 1/5 oif their budget on an
application server doesn't mean that they're not worth doing business with.
andy
Yes and its not the type of client prospect you should waste time and effort
on.
> Well, that would be sad if someone did that. If someone can't calculate an
ROI, they're incompetent to run a company.
>
> CoolJJ
>
>
Author: Rick Root
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284849
> That sure sounds cool.
> What is it?
www.justfuckinggoogleit.com
http://www.google.com/search?q=fips+140
Author: Bruce Sorge
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284848
and not worry about buying upgrades and we'll get new features as they come
out.....
Be careful on this one. For instance, when .NET 2.0 came out, and we wanted
to upgrade our servers, we discovered that a lot of our 1.0 apps would not
work. So in order for us to do this we had to re-write a lot of our apps.
Not from the ground up mind you, just update some code that was not
backwards compatable and would have caused a LOT of issues had we not looked
into this. Not sure if this is still an issue with Microsoft since I have
not touched .NET in over a year, but you might want to look into this part
of it.
Bruce
>
Author: Rey Bango
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284844
Yes and its not the type of client prospect you should waste time and
effort on.
> Well, that would be sad if someone did that. If someone can't calculate an
ROI, they're incompetent to run a company.
>
>
CoolJJ
Author: Rey Bango
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284843
I completely disagree with this statement Andy. Part of being a
consultant is selling your solution and if a person can't effectively do
that, then they shouldn't be in the consulting business at all.
What I've seen over the time I've been involved with ColdFusion is less
people that are interested or willing to sell a solution as opposed to
making their $30-50/hr as a contractor. If thats what person wants to
do, then they might be better of choosing a tool like PHP or .Net. But
in my experience, selling customers on ColdFusion, even when I've had to
explain the ROI, has not been an issue. I really believe people
underestimate the intelligence of prospects and thats just not good
business.
Rey...
Andy Matthews wrote:
> Rick...
>
> You make compelling arguments. But IMO, if you have to explain the ROI to
> someone, then you've already lost the battle....
Author: Dinner
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284841
> Personally, my belief is that server monitoring is a must no matter what
> edition you run, or how many sites you're running. I can't count how
The nice thing about the 1.5 and above JRE, is that you can slap in
some pretty nice monitoring tools yourself. One of the reasons I was
liking jboss for cf7, actually. Nifty stuff, man, and all "free".
Actually, I've got a dedicated jasperserver, for reports and stuff, and
have made Apache do a lot of the work in my last go-round... I wonder
if we even need Enterprise. Hmmm?
Heh. We'll get it anyways, thank the big guy in the sky. The pay may
kinda suck, but the toys are nice, at least. *sigh*
Well, it's interesting to see how it all goes down.
Congratulations to the CF team on getting it out the door. WOOHOO!
Lovely feeling, that.
__
I need some popcorn. Popped at the rate of one kernel per week or so.
Author: Charles E. Heizer1
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284840
So, I have to agree with Dale... Adobe has put a bullet in CF. For example,
Standard Edition would be fine for me but I need Oracle access and now I need to
pay twice that just to do supported Oracle connectivity. We are an enterprise
and when I discussed this with management they came back and said we should just
invest our time in ASP.NET. We can retrain our developers, and not worry about
buying upgrades and we'll get new features as they come out. You know, I don't
disagree with them. I just recently started playing with Visual Studio .Net, and
it's far easier to write web services and create great web content.
Adobe thanks for the memories, a user/developer since version 4.5.
- Charles
On 7/30/07 5:27 AM, "Adam Haskell" <a.haskell@gmail.com> wrote:
I want to echo what Sean said...I looked at CF8 and thought, "wow finally a
product that I would really label Enterprise." Not to say CF7 wasn't
Enterprise, it had some great features and was a great release, but I think
the monitoring and some of the Administration changes helped make it really
enterprise friendly. Thats not mentioning the performance enhancements,
exchange integration (which currently means nothing to Lotus Shops bleh),
and whole suite of ajax tools that really make CF shine as a UI web layer
for large Java apps.
You have to look at this product and realize enterprise is worthless to you
unless you really need super scalability. Standard has it all, albeit
limited/throttled. Sure cfthread and exchange integration and PDF (?) are
throttled but they are available and until you have 100+ (dare I say
probably more) concurrent users using the exact same functionality
Enterprise means very little. Its like a computer, my Mom doesn't need a
dual core 64bit AMD with 2gig of ram and 256mb dedicate graphics card
running iSCSI to send me pictures and read email (unless she is running
Vista then she might ;) ). Gone are the days where you have to have
enterprise to play with those nifty event gateways. If enterprise looks to
expensive to you then you probably don't need it, or you need to look at
some other Enterprise software costs and revisit in 15 minutes. Hell I say
that single move by Adobe to offer a more complete Standard Edition will
open more doors for ColdFusion than any single feature. I say Bravo!
Adam Haskell
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Brad Wood
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284838
That sure sounds cool.
What is it?
~Brad
Also, one thing that hasn't gotten much press is the FIPS 140 compliant
encryption. To anyone that does work with the government this is HUGE.
And
it is very expensive to add/implement.
Author: Raymond Camden
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284837
One more thing about the Server Monitor. It isn't just for use on live
sites. You can very easily use it on your dev server to identify
problems/bottlenecks in your code. I know I've told this story before
- but I still remember using the SM for a grand total of 5 minutes and
finding a big problem with BlogCFC. And this was completely OFF
production. Scott Pinkston had a good blog article on load testing
under OS X. This combined with SM running locally is a great
combination.
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Justin Scott
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284836
> So buy Standard Edition and use FusionReactor. I
> don't see what your problem is there?
I don't have a problem. I believe what I said (which you didn't quote)
was that while I wish it had been included, I was fine with the fact
that it wasn't as long as 3rd party tools are available to do the job.
> I don't see how you can say server monitoring is
> a "must" (for Standard Edition) when it's a brand
> new feature that's never been in the product before.
I didn't say it was a must to be included in Standard, I was making a
blanket statement for development in general. I'm not trying to argue
against their pricing/editioning, just making a point that monitoring is
useful (needed in my opinion) no matter what edition you happen to be
running. Someone implied that if you're running standard you don't need
monitoring anyway, and that is the point I was disagreeing with.
-Justin Scott
Author: Brian Kotek
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284835
I don't get this at all. People are flipping out about Enterprise going up
in cost. How many people run Enterprise?! The standard version stays the
same and gets a huge bump in features. The people complaining are talking
like they raised the price of both versions. CF standard is a STEAL at
$1299, especially with what they have added.
To people who need extremely high performance (server monitoring, unlimited
cfthread, etc.), multiple instances, gov't approved encryption, and all the
rest, $7,500 is nothing for an enterprise application server that does
everything CF does as easily as CF does it.
For goodness sake people, take a deep breath and stop freaking out.
Author: Dave Watts
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284829
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
So?
The point of ColdFusion, from Adobe's perspective, is to make money, not to
be universally adopted. CF will be too much for some peoples' budgets. C'est
la vie.
Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software
http://www.figleaf.com/
Fig Leaf Software provides the highest caliber vendor-authorized
instruction at our training centers in Washington DC, Atlanta,
Chicago, Baltimore, Northern Virginia, or on-site at your location.
Visit http://training.figleaf.com/ for more information!
This email has been processed by SmoothZap - www.smoothwall.net
Author: Sean Corfield
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284824
> Personally, my belief is that server monitoring is a must no matter what
> edition you run, or how many sites you're running. I can't count how
> many times FusionReactor has helped diagnose problems that would have
> taken far longer to fix without it.
So buy Standard Edition and use FusionReactor. I don't see what your
problem is there?
I don't see how you can say server monitoring is a "must" (for
Standard Edition) when it's a brand new feature that's never been in
the product before. You've already bought FusionReactor so you have a
solution, yes?
I'm not trying to be argumentative, just trying to understand your
argument against Adobe's pricing/editioning here.
--
Sean A Corfield -- (904) 302-SEAN
An Architect's View -- http://corfield.org/
"If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive."
-- Margaret Atwood
Author: Eric Roberts
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284821
If they think that then their business already lost the battle...
Eric
Rick...
You make compelling arguments. But IMO, if you have to explain the ROI to
someone, then you've already lost the battle. There might be a few people
that would be convinced by your (compelling) arguments. But most people are
going to see that price tag and not even BOTHER reading the rest of the
stuff about it.
They'll simply think "CF is too much for my budget" and go install PHP or
something.
andy
>
> To be honest, the difference between $3,000/CPU and $3,750/CPU is
> pretty negligible in an enterprise world.
I would agree here. The cost of the server is pretty minor compared to the
cost of everything else that goes into building an enterprise environment.
Especially when you consider the following:
#1 - Coldfusion Enterprise includes a LOT of things that you'd probably have
to pay extra for in other environments.
#2 - It's a LOT easier to develop advanced applications in Coldfusion versus
OTHER environments (IMO, obviously)
As a developer working 40 hours a week at a certain "hourly" rate...
if I'm even 10% more productive working on Coldfusion versus another
environment, that alone makes the COST of Coldfusion worthwhile.
Let's say the cost of my employment, including benefits, is about $50/hour.
The 10% productivity increase would amount to 208 hours, or an additional
$10,000 in work completed in a typical 2080 hour work year.
Assuming the life of a Coldfusion 8 license is only 2 years and you're not
buying a subscription... that's over $20,000 in savings.. just by using
Coldfusion because you can be more productive on it.
Author: mac jordan
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284814
> You have to look at this product and realize enterprise is worthless to
> you
> unless you really need super scalability. Standard has it all, albeit
> limited/throttled. Sure cfthread and exchange integration and PDF (?) are
> throttled
Has anyone got a matrix of just *how* the PDF is throtted? Because I'm
quoting for a big form-based app at the moment, and I would like to know
what the limitations are with PDF in standard as opposed to Enterprise.
p.s. why don't people *trim* their quoting!
--
mac jordan
home: www.kestrel.org
work: www.webhorus.net
them: www.jordan-cats.org
Author: Brian Kotek
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284812
Also, one thing that hasn't gotten much press is the FIPS 140 compliant
encryption. To anyone that does work with the government this is HUGE. And
it is very expensive to add/implement.
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Justin Scott
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284808
> I'm sure there will be a large group who will bring up
> the whole lack of server monitoring and multiple logins
> but come on, for a standard installation do you really
> need that?
Personally, my belief is that server monitoring is a must no matter what
edition you run, or how many sites you're running. I can't count how
many times FusionReactor has helped diagnose problems that would have
taken far longer to fix without it. It also helps us see where problems
are before they get big and nasty and bring the whole server down. I
would have liked to see integrated monitoring in the standard edition,
yes, but as long as we have 3rd-party tools available for standard I can
live with that.
I will say, though, that every version of ColdFusion that has come out
has been more and more stable, so the need for these tools has
decreased. They are still very handy when you do need them however.
-Justin
Author: JJ Cool
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284806
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Well, that would be sad if someone did that. If someone can't calculate an ROI,
they're incompetent to run a company.
CoolJJ
Author: JJ Cool
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284805
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Excellent post! I was going to say the same thing. But, another thing people
don't seem to to consider is how much did it cost Adobe to develop CF 8? How much
money did they spend on research? On programmers writing code? On testing? On
marketing? I think it is perfectly reasonable what they are asking for it. Just
as you expect to develop ColdFusion applications and make a nice living, so does
Adobe their developers!
CoolJJ
Adobe has to pay its developers too.
Author: Andy Matthews
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284799
Rick...
You make compelling arguments. But IMO, if you have to explain the ROI to
someone, then you've already lost the battle. There might be a few people
that would be convinced by your (compelling) arguments. But most people are
going to see that price tag and not even BOTHER reading the rest of the
stuff about it.
They'll simply think "CF is too much for my budget" and go install PHP or
something.
andy
>
> To be honest, the difference between $3,000/CPU and $3,750/CPU is
> pretty negligible in an enterprise world.
I would agree here. The cost of the server is pretty minor compared to the
cost of everything else that goes into building an enterprise environment.
Especially when you consider the following:
#1 - Coldfusion Enterprise includes a LOT of things that you'd probably have
to pay extra for in other environments.
#2 - It's a LOT easier to develop advanced applications in Coldfusion versus
OTHER environments (IMO, obviously)
As a developer working 40 hours a week at a certain "hourly" rate...
if I'm even 10% more productive working on Coldfusion versus another
environment, that alone makes the COST of Coldfusion worthwhile.
Let's say the cost of my employment, including benefits, is about $50/hour.
The 10% productivity increase would amount to 208 hours, or an additional
$10,000 in work completed in a typical 2080 hour work year.
Assuming the life of a Coldfusion 8 license is only 2 years and you're not
buying a subscription... that's over $20,000 in savings.. just by using
Coldfusion because you can be more productive on it.
Author: jonese
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284798
Poor Adobe. No matter what they do someone will be the "hater". Like
Sean mentioned previously with the feature spread this time (versus 7)
there should be less "But i don't want to buy Enterprise for Feature
X, why didn't they put it in standard". I'm sure there will be a large
group who will bring up the whole lack of server monitoring and
multiple logins but come on, for a standard installation do you really
need that? My guess is that you probably don't, and if you can make an
argument for it then I'm sure you can convince the powers that be to
upgrade. i know i will.
jonese
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Rick Root
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284792
> To be honest, the difference between $3,000/CPU and $3,750/CPU is
> pretty negligible in an enterprise world.
I would agree here. The cost of the server is pretty minor compared
to the cost of everything else that goes into building an enterprise
environment.
Especially when you consider the following:
#1 - Coldfusion Enterprise includes a LOT of things that you'd
probably have to pay extra for in other environments.
#2 - It's a LOT easier to develop advanced applications in Coldfusion
versus OTHER environments (IMO, obviously)
As a developer working 40 hours a week at a certain "hourly" rate...
if I'm even 10% more productive working on Coldfusion versus another
environment, that alone makes the COST of Coldfusion worthwhile.
Let's say the cost of my employment, including benefits, is about
$50/hour. The 10% productivity increase would amount to 208 hours, or
an additional $10,000 in work completed in a typical 2080 hour work
year.
Assuming the life of a Coldfusion 8 license is only 2 years and you're
not buying a subscription... that's over $20,000 in savings.. just by
using Coldfusion because you can be more productive on it.
want to do document searching (Verity) or PDF creation (cfdocument) or
enterprise-level reporting (cfreport) or high quality charting
(cfchart) with ASP.NET, Java, or PHP? In addition to the extra work
required to do those things with third party softare - you'll probably
fork out $$$ for that third party software too.
Rick
Author: Adam Haskell
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284784
I want to echo what Sean said...I looked at CF8 and thought, "wow finally a
product that I would really label Enterprise." Not to say CF7 wasn't
Enterprise, it had some great features and was a great release, but I think
the monitoring and some of the Administration changes helped make it really
enterprise friendly. Thats not mentioning the performance enhancements,
exchange integration (which currently means nothing to Lotus Shops bleh),
and whole suite of ajax tools that really make CF shine as a UI web layer
for large Java apps.
You have to look at this product and realize enterprise is worthless to you
unless you really need super scalability. Standard has it all, albeit
limited/throttled. Sure cfthread and exchange integration and PDF (?) are
throttled but they are available and until you have 100+ (dare I say
probably more) concurrent users using the exact same functionality
Enterprise means very little. Its like a computer, my Mom doesn't need a
dual core 64bit AMD with 2gig of ram and 256mb dedicate graphics card
running iSCSI to send me pictures and read email (unless she is running
Vista then she might ;) ). Gone are the days where you have to have
enterprise to play with those nifty event gateways. If enterprise looks to
expensive to you then you probably don't need it, or you need to look at
some other Enterprise software costs and revisit in 15 minutes. Hell I say
that single move by Adobe to offer a more complete Standard Edition will
open more doors for ColdFusion than any single feature. I say Bravo!
Adam Haskell
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Sean Corfield
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284782
> As for your post on CF 8 being a dead product because of the price
> increase, note that the increase if for Enterprise. How many people
> here (other than me) actually use or need enterprise.
Me!
To be honest, the difference between $3,000/CPU and $3,750/CPU is
pretty negligible in an enterprise world. For the - new-in-8 -
(multi-)server monitoring and RDS/Admin user management features,
unlimited CFTHREAD and unlimited MS Exchange integration, that extra
$750/CPU is well worth it (as well as the general reasons Enterprise
is worth paying more for: unlimited event gateways, PDF/document
services, reporting etc).
The key thing everyone should be rejoicing about is that Standard
Edition includes: event gateways, pdf/document services, cfthread, MS
Exchange integration, reporting, presentation generation. There would
be a lot of complaints if these were Enterprise only features. There
were plenty of complaints around CFMX 7 because event gateways were
Enterprise-only!
--
Sean A Corfield -- (904) 302-SEAN
An Architect's View -- http://corfield.org/
"If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive."
-- Margaret Atwood
Author: Michael Dinowitz
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284781
6 times? I think your talking apples and rocks. Both are roundish, but....
The 6 times your talking about is the cost of moving from standard to
enterprise. For those who are not making that major leap (most
everyone), the figure of 6 times is just a scare tactic.
As for who's using it, many people including sites under the House of
Fusion banner, like Fusion Authority. House of Fusion itself will be
moved to 8 as soon as I have another free second (and after Jury Duty
who's timing sucks).
> How many people use it?
>
> After this stunt, not many I hope. Almost 6 times the price is just stupid.
>
> I had budget allocated to upgrade from Standard to Enterprise, first time to
purchase Enterprise, that just went out the
door.
Author: Dale Fraser
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284780
Adobe today put some nails in the ColdFusion coffin with the Release of
ColdFusion 8. To the suprise of the world, they decided to increase the price by
25%. What a joke when the biggest complaint is the price when compared to like
products.
I'm not sure who made this decission, or if any big shot in Adobe even fought for
a price reduction but Adobe's one and only shot at doing something significant
with ColdFusion 8 has been ruined.
I will now seriously consider the future of our developments here and look at
alternatives that won't cost be $7,499 US per server.
Ben and the team, great product you should be proud, but I'm ashamed that you let
this
happen.
Author: Michael Dinowitz
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284778
This url?
http://www.adobe.com/products/coldfusion/
>the URL still has a typo
Author: Dale Fraser
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284776
How many people use it?
After this stunt, not many I hope. Almost 6 times the price is just stupid.
I had budget allocated to upgrade from Standard to Enterprise, first time to
purchase Enterprise, that just went out the
door.
Author: AJ Mercer
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284771
the URL still has a typo
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: James Holmes
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284770
To add to the point, who has Enterprise without maintenance? CF8 is
costing us precisely zip over what we've already paid (and considering
what we get the maintenance was a bargain).
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Michael Dinowitz
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284769
Dale,
I'd suggest posting the content of your blog here rather than just the url.
As for your post on CF 8 being a dead product because of the price
increase, note that the increase if for Enterprise. How many people
here (other than me) actually use or need enterprise.
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Dale Fraser
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:52703#284767
http://dalefraser.blogspot.com/2007/07/adobe-nails-coldfusion-cofin.html
Regards
Dale Fraser
http://dalefraser.blogspot.com
|
May 24, 2012
|
Latest Fusion Authority Articles
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
