Mark,
Here's my take on ASP vs CF. First off I have developed both ASP and CF
sites. I find CF easier to work with and to debug CF allows me to get a
site out the door quite a lot faster than ASP.
Unless you're strongly into Visual Basic Script or JavaScript, CF is easier
to use and learn. For instance, to do a simple query in ASP, it takes about
10 to 20 lines to query the database and then output the information to a
web page. In contrast CF can do the exact same task in 6 to 8 lines.
ColdFusion is easier to use, less cryptic and more powerful. If you know
HTML you know a lot of what it takes to code a Cold Fusion Page.
There's a pretty good review of Cold Fusion at CNet's Builder.com
<http://builder.cnet.com/webbuilding/0-7255-8-6615879-1.html?tag=st.bl.7255.
dir_rev.7255-8-6615879-1>
Compare how long does it take the average developer to set up a database
enabled site in CF, ASP or whatever. CF is much more of a rapid development
environment and considerably more efficient and understandable. For example,
the following ASP script connects to a database and outputs the results to a
browser:
< % Set OBJdbConnection =
Server.CreateObject("ADODB.Connection")
OBJdbConnection.Open "nba_membership"
SQLQuery = "Select id, business FROM Directory"
Set RSCustomers = OBJdbConnection.Execute(SQLQuery)
Do Until rsCustomers.EOF
Response.Write (rsCustomers("ID") & " " & rsCustomers("Business"))
rsCustomers.Move
Next Loop
% >
The same query and output in ColdFusion looks like this:
<cfquery name="rsCustomers" datasource="nba_membership">
select id, business from directory
</cfquery>
<cfoutput query="rsCustomers">#id# #business#</cfoutput>
ASP take 9 lines to query the database and return the results to the
browser, CF does it in 4. Both snippets do the exact same thing, but the
ColdFusion code does it more elegantly and far more simply. It uses fewer
commands, and those commands make a lot more sense. It doesn't take a genius
to figure out what <cfquery> and <cfoutput> do. The ASP is a lot less
intuitive.
Also CF has integrated POP and SMTP mail components, is fully integrated
with LDAP, and has a native search engine built into it based on the very
powerful Verity search engine. In CF its fully integrated into the server.
You typically have to pay extra for those components with ASP.
The result is that developers take far less time to develop an effective,
usable and scalable site. For instance Autobytel.com and VictoriasSecret.com
both are not what you would small sites. They are both very high traffic
sites. Both run on the ColdFusion Enterprise Servers.
When you are paying developers $65 per hour or more to develop a site, if a
CF developer can set up the site in 6 hours vs. 18 or more for ASP or
whatever, then you've paid for the ColdFusion server with the money you've
saved in a very short time.
CF sites are as cheap to host as ASP sites, cheaper if you consider the
number of security holes that ASP introduces to your server. Additionally
there are free ColdFusion hosting companies, such as
http://www.cfm-resources.com/. Cannot get more free than that. There are
also some very low cost ones like http://www.Shanje.com or http://icn.net/,
both of which charge around $15 to $25 for CF hosting.
Additionally CF works with Unix, Linux (all flavors apparently, but I have
not tested it yet), and NT. You need expensive add-ons to get ASP to work
with Unix.
regards,
larry
--
Larry C. Lyons
ColdFusion/Web Developer
EBStor.com
8870 Rixlew Lane, Suite 204
Manassas, Virginia 20109-3795
tel: (703) 393-7930
fax: (703) 393-2659
Web: http://www.ebstor.com
http://www.pacel.com
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Chaos, panic, and disorder - my work here is done.
--
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mark Stewart [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2001 10:33 AM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: cf vs php and others
>
>
> All,
>
> Since I have no experience with php and limited exposure to perl, can
> someone articulate to me why on earth would someone want to use
> something other than cf (Java not included). I'm already aware of the
> obvious answers such as, price, the cf community,
> Macromedia's apparent
> direction with the product. What I'm really looking for is compelling
> evidence as to why php or perl would be better, technically or
> otherwise. Personally, I don't think they are, but I want to
> hear other
> perspectives.
>
> Thanks,
> Mark
>
>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at
http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-community@houseoffusion.com/
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
