Guidelines, Frameworks, Endorsements (was: ColdFusion and the Web Application Market

Sent: Friday, May 21, 2004 7:47 PM To: Macromedia-Talk Subject: Guidelines, Frameworks, Endorsements (was: ColdFusion and the Web Application Market On May 17, 2004, at 12:30 PM, Jeff Garza wrote: >> True that ColdFusion includes more functionality that straight ASP or >> ASP.NET, but... Watch out for ASP.NET 2.0 that is currently under >> development > Watch out for Blackstone that is currently under development :) > > Seriously, I'm just making the point that Macromedia / ColdFusion isn't > standing still either. And Ben Forta is quick to point out that > Blackstone may well prove to be the most significant release of >ColdFusion so far... True, I've been following Blackstone and can't wait to get on the Beta. Each and every successive release of ColdFusion has been a jaw dropping experience for me.  Don't get me wrong... I'm a firm believer in ColdFusion. Ben will be at my usergroup (the Phoenix CFUG) on the 16th of June. >> Could you imagine being able to write an entier Intranet Application >> from a wizard?  With Authentication and extra Web Service >> Widgets?  Tough to beat if you ask me... > But you can pretty much already do this with a good CMS anyway. > Content-based Intranets are easy to build - applications are the hard > part and a decent Intranet has a lot of custom application > functionality that no wizard will ever be able to build for you. Don't > get too swept up in Microsoft's wild claims. While true, that is still using a third party app (yes FarCry is free and a damn good system but...) This is completely integrated with the IDE, the Framework and the Server.  Check out some of the improvements to Visual Studio (Whidbey).  It's going to be one of the most amazing IDE's ever produced. (and one that Macromedia should take a cue from when designing the next version of Dreamweaver...) >> I agree with you. I think that ASP.NET will become the dominant >> platform for web development within the next 5 years in corporate >> America. > Maybe, maybe not. I think ASP.NET will supplant old ASP - that should > be a no-brainer. I think use of Java technologies will continue to grow > as the market grows (even if ASP.NET grows faster, there will continue > to be a huge amount of Java on the web). True Java will continue to grow, but I think that MS will probably eat up a steadily bigger slice of the pie, even if the overall pie is getting larger. The good thing for Macromedia is that there will probably be a significant amount of Flash front-ending that larger pie. >> One other point that Microsoft has going for them is their Patterns >> and Practices site. > The Java community has a huge lead on MS in this area but it's > certainly nice to see MS adopting better practice. Interestingly, it >appears their C# coding guidelines recommend NOT using Hungarian > notation because it causes maintenance problems, according to the > Philips C# coding guidelines (which are based on the MS guidelines - I > haven't had time to follow up on the MS source document yet). That's > something I've been arguing for years and when folks countered my > arguments, they usually pointed at past MS practice. I have to admit > that C# looks good (although it does some things I really don't like - > more on that on my blog in due course) and what I've seen of their > coding guidelines quoted in the Philips document is much more in line > with what I would consider best practice than what they used to > preach... I definitely agree with you on this.  Just wish we had something like this from Macromedia.  That would lend more credibility to ColdFusion in general. >> Macromedia needs to have something like this as well.  I recall the >> great debate over whether or not Macromedia was endorsing the use of >> Mach-II because they used it on their site...  I found it silly that >> they couldn't, as a company, come out and say that yes this works and >> this is why... > It's definitely a tricky area! > I published my team's CFMX coding guidelines on my own website. Then we > started adopting Mach II and produced the Mach II Development Guide > which also went up on my site. But folks in the community wanted a way > to give feedback easily on the documents and someone suggested I use > LiveDocs... sounded reasonable so I checked with the documentation team > in-house and they had no objections so I moved the two guideline docs > to LiveDocs. > While most folks were pleased to see the guidelines and be able to give > feedback, some people complained that Macromedia should *not* be laying > down best practices - something I found rather strange. I never understood this myself.. ? <snip> >Now I'm touring user groups talking about Mach II and its use at >Macromedia - and I'll be at CFUN-04 this year with that talk. Sean, if you ever want to come to Phoenix, we'd love to have a talk on Mach-II.  I know that Rob Brooks-Bilson is implementing it at Amkor and there are many others here in the valley considering it (myself included). It has, in a way, become the de facto architecture to use when going OO with CF. >What do folks really want from Macromedia? Do they want 'official' >coding guidelines? Do they want an 'official' framework recommendation? >I make it pretty clear in my Mach II talk that it isn't the right >choice for everyone - there are folks out there who are against any >sort of framework and they won't be pleased if Macromedia endorses any >framework. It seems to me that Macromedia is damned if it does and >damned if it doesn't. I think that Macromedia needs to stand firm and endorse a framework.  No framework will ever be the right thing for all applications, but, at least it will be fully available and fully supported if and when someone wants to use it. Thanks for the response Sean!  You and your team have done a great job with the new Macromedia site!!! Cheers, Jeff Garza Manager, Phoenix CFUG jeff@hawkandheron.com