House of Fusion
Search over 2,500 ColdFusion resources here
  
Home of the ColdFusion Community

Mailing Lists
Home /  Groups /  ColdFusion Talk (CF-Talk)

Trying to understand the ColdFusion 8 - Net integration

  << Previous Post |  RSS |  Tree View |  Sort Latest First |  Subscribe to this Group Next >> 

Trying to understand the CF8 - .Net integration

All, I'm just starting to learn .Net.  I'm trying to grasp the concept coldfusion.developer 10/02/2007 09:11 AM
On Tuesday 02 Oct 2007, coldfusion.developer@att.net wrote: Tom Chiverton 10/02/2007 09:27 AM
Plus, as I recently learned, you don't have to register the DLL with the Dawson, Michael 10/02/2007 09:33 AM
> All, I'm just starting to learn .Net.  I'm trying to grasp Dave Watts 10/02/2007 09:49 AM
Dave, I loved your reply.  Made me crack up and almost fall off coldfusion.developer 10/02/2007 10:34 AM
I have to agree with you on this Dave. When I was working for in Dallas, Bruce Sorge 10/02/2007 10:54 AM
On Tuesday 02 Oct 2007, dwatts@figleaf.com wrote: Tom Chiverton 10/02/2007 11:01 AM
Dave Watts wrote: Vince Bonfanti 10/02/2007 12:17 PM
> I realize I have to tread carefully here, so again, I'm not advocating that Charlie Griefer 10/02/2007 12:28 PM
> I realize I have to tread carefully here ... Dave Watts 10/02/2007 01:15 PM
On Tuesday 02 Oct 2007, vince@newatlanta.com wrote: Tom Chiverton 10/03/2007 04:40 AM
Come on Vince. "Some people" is a terrible way to make an argument. Matt Williams 10/03/2007 11:11 AM
Dave Watts wrote: Vince Bonfanti 10/03/2007 11:55 AM
> Yes, agreed. I guess I was responding to your comment that, Dave Watts 10/03/2007 12:16 PM

10/02/2007 09:11 AM
Author: coldfusion.developer Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:53671#289903 All, I'm just starting to learn .Net.  I'm trying to grasp the concept of what .Net assemblies are.  Would it be fair to say that they are like CFCs?  I'm trying to get a comparible CF analogy. I'm assuming you can't access to lines of logic within an .Net Web page, but that these .Net assemblies are compiled dlls or something.  I'm trying to understand exactly what I can grab from a .Net application. A layman's explanation would be so appreciated.  My boss, who is a director of Marketing has talked about switching to .Net because it what some Web agencies are saying we should be using. http://www.brooks-bilson.com/blogs/rob/index.cfm/2006/10/24/Adobe-MAX-2006-Session--ColdFusion-Net-Integration Thanks D
10/02/2007 09:27 AM
Author: Tom Chiverton Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:53671#289908 On Tuesday 02 Oct 2007, coldfusion.developer@att.net wrote: > All, I'm just starting to learn .Net.  I'm trying to grasp the concept of > what .Net assemblies are.  Would it be fair to say that they are like CFCs? AFAICT it's a new name for 'DLL'. > A layman's explanation would be so appreciated.  My boss, who is a director > of Marketing has talked about switching to .Net because it what some Web > agencies are saying we should be using. Well, firstly, marketing thought it up, so it should carry no technical weight. Secondly, obviously you have no .Net knowledge, so it'll take much longer to get anything done even after you've spent all the time and money getting trained up. Thirdly, .Net is never always the right answer, just as CFML is never always the right answer. What do these 'Web agencies' do (or thing you do) that makes them think .Net must be the One True Way ? -- Tom Chiverton Helping to globally deliver transparent communities on: http://thefalken.livejournal.com **************************************************** 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 Solicitors Regulation Authority. 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.
10/02/2007 09:33 AM
Author: Dawson, Michael Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:53671#289909 Plus, as I recently learned, you don't have to register the DLL with the operating system.  You can point CF8 to the DLL, itself, and CF will find it.  This eliminates the step of having to register DLLs when setting up new servers or when updating the DLLs, themselves. M!ke On Tuesday 02 Oct 2007, coldfusion.developer@att.net wrote: > All, I'm just starting to learn .Net.  I'm trying to grasp the concept > of what .Net assemblies are.  Would it be fair to say that they are like CFCs? AFAICT it's a new name for 'DLL'. > A layman's explanation would be so appreciated.  My boss, who is a > director of Marketing has talked about switching to .Net because it > what some Web agencies are saying we should be using. Well, firstly, marketing thought it up, so it should carry no technical weight. Secondly, obviously you have no .Net knowledge, so it'll take much longer to get anything done even after you've spent all the time and money getting trained up. Thirdly, .Net is never always the right answer, just as CFML is never always the right answer. What do these 'Web agencies' do (or thing you do) that makes them think .Net must be the One True Way ? -- Tom Chiverton Helping to globally deliver transparent communities on: http://thefalken.livejournal.com
10/02/2007 09:49 AM
Author: Dave Watts Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:53671#289910 > All, I'm just starting to learn .Net.  I'm trying to grasp > the concept of what .Net assemblies are.  Would it be fair to > say that they are like CFCs?  I'm trying to get a comparible > CF analogy. I'm assuming you can't access to lines of logic > within an .Net Web page, but that these .Net assemblies are > compiled dlls or something.  I'm trying to understand exactly > what I can grab from a .Net application. There's a great, simple example right here that should make things clear: http://tutorial11.learncf.com/ > A layman's explanation would be so appreciated.  My boss, who > is a director of Marketing has talked about switching to .Net > because it what some Web agencies are saying we should be using. Are these web agencies going to do your development for you? I suppose they would probably like to. Your director of marketing makes technical decisions about infrastructure? Based on what "some web agencies" tell him? It sounds like you live in a Dilbert strip, or, alternatively, hell. As a partner at a "web agency" myself (whatever that is exactly) I would be happy to tell your boss that he should put down the crack pipe if he thinks it's a good idea to switch from CF to .NET. For what it's worth, it's almost never a good idea to switch from CF to .NET, or vice-versa, if you have any significant investment in application code. Anyone who tells you otherwise is just angling for your money. 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!
10/02/2007 10:34 AM
Author: coldfusion.developer Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:53671#289923 Dave, I loved your reply.  Made me crack up and almost fall off my chair.  The comment about the crack pipe and being in a Dilbert comic strip was hilarious.   Thanks everyone for your input and feedback. ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
10/02/2007 10:54 AM
Author: Bruce Sorge Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:53671#289926 I have to agree with you on this Dave. When I was working for in Dallas, we had been using CF for many years. Suddenly, out of the blue they (upper management prodded by a lower manager who had all Microsoft programmers and NO CF programmers on his team, and they were in charge of the new physicians portal) decided that we need to switch to .NET. So not only did we have thousands of man hours invested in the CF stuff, but us CF'ers were forced to learn .NET. Now I have nothing against learning another language, and in fact since they were willing to let me and the others continue working there and learn .NET while getting paid, I did not mind too much. But I look back on this and I wonder why they did that. Everything that the portal does now could have been done in .CF. Many of the CF apps I wrote I personally converted to .NET. I got a first hand look at how much overhead is involved in creating .NET apps as opposed to CF. Once my .NET skills were up to speed, it still took me almost twice as long to re-write the apps in .NET than when I originally did in CF. Bruce ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
10/02/2007 11:01 AM
Author: Tom Chiverton Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:53671#289928 On Tuesday 02 Oct 2007, dwatts@figleaf.com wrote: > It sounds like you live in a > Dilbert strip, or, alternatively, hell. Damn, I wish I'd said that :-) -- Tom Chiverton Helping to vitalistically initiate turn-key e-services on: http://thefalken.livejournal.com **************************************************** 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 Solicitors Regulation Authority. 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.
10/02/2007 12:17 PM
Author: Vince Bonfanti Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:53671#289953 Dave Watts wrote: > >For what it's worth, it's almost never a good idea to switch from CF to >.NET, or vice-versa, if you have any significant investment in application >code. Anyone who tells you otherwise is just angling for your money. > Hmmm...there are many good reasons to stay with CF rather than switching to .NET, but there are also many good reasons to switch from CF to .NET, as we've seen many companies do over the past few years (starting with MySpace.com). I'm not advocating that anyone *should* make that switch, but here are some of the reasons we've heard from people who have made the switch (not necessarily in any particular order): 1. Licensing costs. Some people balk at paying $7500 per CPU pair for CF Enterprise when ASP.NET is included in Windows at no cost. I understand that CF Standard is $1300 per server, and that for a small number of servers even the $7500 per 2-CPU cost can be small compared to overall project costs. But, for someone with dozens, or hundreds, or thousands of servers, the CF license costs can become a real obstacle. 2. Performance and realiability. Some people find they get better performance and realiability of their web applications running .NET rather than CF. 3. Developer tools. Some people find that the tools available for ASP.NET development--especially Visual Studio--are superior to tools available for CF development. 4. Developer availability. Some people find it's easier to hire trained, experienced ASP.NET developers than it is to find and hire trained, experienced CF developers. I realize I have to tread carefully here, so again, I'm not advocating that anyone should switch from CF to .NET, but am disputing Dave's statement that, "it's almost never a good idea to switch from CF to .NET" by pointing out that there are many organizations for whom it has in fact been a very good idea, and listing some of the reasons why. Since I'm sure to be accused of "just angling for your money" anyway, let me point out that BlueDragon.NET can be very effective in helping you migrate from CF to .NET while preserving your investment in CFML code: http://blog.newatlanta.com/index.cfm?mode=entry&entry=9DFBA97F-124C-10CB-361E10851B5FAB32 Cheers, Vince Bonfanti New Atlanta Communications, LLC http://www.newatlanta.com
10/02/2007 12:28 PM
Author: Charlie Griefer Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:53671#289957 > I realize I have to tread carefully here, so again, I'm not advocating that anyone should switch from CF to .NET, but am disputing Dave's statement that, "it's almost never a good idea to switch from CF to .NET" by pointing out that there are many organizations for whom it has in fact been a very good idea, and listing some of the reasons why. Dave's statement was actually "it's almost never a good idea to switch from CF to .NET, OR VICE-VERSA" (emphasis mine). He further qualifies the statement with: "if you have any significant investment in application code." Just pointing out that in reality what he said was very, very different than just saying, "it's almost never a good idea to switch from CF to .NET", which you pulled out of context. -- Charlie Griefer ================================================ "...All the world shall be your enemy, Prince with a Thousand Enemies, and whenever they catch you, they will kill you. But first they must catch you, digger, listener, runner, prince with a swift warning. Be cunning and full of tricks and your people shall never be destroyed."
10/02/2007 01:15 PM
Author: Dave Watts Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:53671#289962 > I realize I have to tread carefully here ... Not on my account! > Since I'm sure to be accused of "just angling for your money" > anyway, let me point out that BlueDragon.NET can be very > effective in helping you migrate from CF to .NET while > preserving your investment in CFML code ... Well, first, you ARE angling for our money! That's your job! And there's nothing wrong with that. And there's nothing wrong with "web agencies" telling their clients, or potential clients, that they should use the platform preferred by said web agencies. Everyone's gotta eat. There is, however, a problem with people making uninformed decisions based on what these "web agencies" recommend without any sort of ROI evaluation. That said, your product is not really what I was talking about. I'm constantly hearing people talk about moving from platform X to platform Y, and having to rebuild their applications from scratch accordingly. And, in the vast majority of cases, that's just stupid. It's a bad business decision. http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000069.html For example, there was an article in one of the trade mags a while ago about a company that ported their app from CF to .NET, and then to Java. Now that's just all kinds of dumb. To the extent that your product allows people to preserve their investment in their application code, that's a good thing. To the extent that people have to modify their code when migrating from CF7 to BD.NET (or to CF8), that's a significant cost that people often overlook. 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!
10/03/2007 04:40 AM
Author: Tom Chiverton Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:53671#290045 On Tuesday 02 Oct 2007, vince@newatlanta.com wrote: >  1. Licensing costs. Some people balk at paying $7500 per CPU pair for CF > Enterprise when ASP.NET is included in Windows at no cost. ASP has less features than CF8. It depends what you use. And of course, if you use CF you can avoid the Microsoft O/S tax. >  2. Performance and realiability. Some people find they get better > performance and realiability of their web applications running .NET rather > than CF. I've never been convinced by this. I think this happens when people switch because they're rewriting the app from scratch, removing all the cruft and sticky plaster. >  3. Developer tools. Some people find that the tools available for ASP.NET > development--especially Visual Studio--are superior to tools available for > CF development. This is probably true. CFEclipse is good, but it's not Flex Builder. >  4. Developer availability. Some people find it's easier to hire trained, > experienced ASP.NET developers than it is to find and hire trained, > experienced CF developers. I agree. We can't seem to get hold of a decent extra one for love or money ! > I realize I have to tread carefully here, so again, I'm not advocating that > anyone should switch from CF to .NET, but am disputing Dave's statement > that, "it's almost never a good idea to switch from CF to .NET" I'd dispute the unqualified version too. -- Tom Chiverton Helping to completely brand viral solutions on: http://thefalken.livejournal.com **************************************************** 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 Solicitors Regulation Authority. 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.
10/03/2007 11:11 AM
Author: Matt Williams Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:53671#290071 Come on Vince. "Some people" is a terrible way to make an argument. Some people survive suicide attempts. Some people smoke a pack of cigarettes a day and live to be 100. For the cost issue, if that is all it boils down to, why not go with all open-source/free? Plenty of job seekers there too. ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more ----- -- Matt Williams "It's the question that drives us."
10/03/2007 11:55 AM
Author: Vince Bonfanti Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:53671#290077 Dave Watts wrote: > >There is, >however, a problem with people making uninformed decisions based on what >these "web agencies" recommend without any sort of ROI evaluation. > Yes, agreed. I guess I was responding to your comment that, "I would be happy to tell your boss that he should put down the crack pipe if he thinks it's a good idea to switch from CF to .NET." While that may play well for laughs in this forum, it's not very sound technical or business advice. I was trying to make the point that sometimes it *is* a good idea to switch from CF to .NET (regardless of whether or not you choose to use BlueDragon to help make the switch). Dismissing anyone who considers making such a switch as being "on crack" is silly. To Matt Williams: I used the phrase "some people" to indicate that I realize the statements I made in favor of switching from CF to .NET aren't true for "all people." Sometime it's a valid decision to stay with CF, and sometimes it's a valid decision to switch to .NET (or to Java/JSP/J2EE, or to PHP). I would never argue that it's the right decision for everyone in all situations to switch from CF to .NET, but for some people it is. That was my point.
10/03/2007 12:16 PM
Author: Dave Watts Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:53671#290080 > Yes, agreed. I guess I was responding to your comment that, > "I would be happy to tell your boss that he should put down > the crack pipe if he thinks it's a good idea to switch from > CF to .NET." You should reread the entire paragraph from my original email containing the sentence above. Taking statements out of context doesn't facilitate a useful discussion. Here's what the original poster wrote to which I was responding: "My boss, who is a director of Marketing has talked about switching to .Net because it what some Web agencies are saying we should be using." Does that sound like a good business justification to you? For migrating from anything to anything else? Because "some Web agencies" like it better? > While that may play well for laughs in this forum, it's not very > sound technical or business advice. I was trying to make the point > that sometimes it *is* a good idea to switch from CF to .NET > (regardless of whether or not you choose to use BlueDragon to help > make the switch). Dismissing anyone who considers making such a > switch as being "on crack" is silly. Again, context matters. If the original poster had written something like this: "My boss has talked about switching to .NET because (we'd save significant amounts of money|we have more .NET programmers available|we use Microsoft infrastructure for everything else|etc)." then, yes, my dismissal would have been silly, and I wouldn't have made it in the first place. Of course, as you well know, that's not what happened, and I stand by my assertion that the original poster's boss is about to make a bad business decision based on his ignorance and gullibility. I like .NET, actually. Not as much as CF, but I wouldn't recommend that anyone migrate from one to the other just because I prefer one to the other. You have a fine product. You don't need to be so defensive. 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!
<< Previous Thread Today's Threads Next Thread >>

Search cf-talk

December 20, 2014

<<   <   Today   >   >>
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
   1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31       

Designer, Developer and mobile workflow conference