Just a wee note on the JDBC problem. In case some of you may have missed it in amongst the other info in my earlier posts. I've opted to use the odbc sockets instead for MS SQL datasources.
I haven't been able to test properly yet, but I'm guessing it will be more stable than the JDBC driver. So perhaps some could use this a temporary fix until the JDBC driver problems have been ironed out? Dave -----Original Message----- From: Mark A. Kruger - CFG [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 08 October 2002 16:33 To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: LONG time CF Supporter - About ready to dump CF! Jesse, Pardon me for asking but... how does MM handle a situation where something worked correctly on CF 5, but now is failing on CFMX? Is that CFMX? Or do I pay to have MM tell me I need to re-write code? This "connection reset by peer" JDBC socket error that's been troubling us (notice I did not say "bugging" :) could well be the result of some server setting or SQL config option we have overlooked that ODBC/CF 5 ignores, but JDBC looks for. If that turns out to be the case, would MM charge for that? -mk -----Original Message----- From: Jesse Noller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2002 10:05 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: LONG time CF Supporter - About ready to dump CF! > Jesse, what Lee is trying to say is that MM should help him with the > problem, without him having to pay extra for tech support. He is *not* paying if the problem is with CFMX! Not. Paying. > > I had a problem getting CFMX to run on my development system - the > services wouldn't start when my system booted, MM wanted to charge me > for tech support, and it wasn't until I posted to this list finding > others with the same problem. They helped me and fixed the problem. > I know Lee personally and he is one of the biggest CF supporters. Lee > has helped me patiently through many CF problems, and to hear he's > having these problems with MM is very discouraging. But you're *not* paying if the bug is with CFMX and not your code! > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jesse Noller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2002 7:05 AM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: RE: LONG time CF Supporter - About ready to dump CF! > > > Lee- > > While I can understand your predicament, and I will pass this > issue around to other I know of, I fail to see the rationale here. > > Software, by it's very nature (programmed by humans, who are > fallible) tends to have some bugs and problems. > > There is a large group of people who run CFMX without issues and > the only people who scream on the mailing lists and the forums are those > with issues, therefore, if you took a daily snapshot of it all, you > could very well think that the software, CFMX, is crap. > > However, look at the support forums for WindowsXP, Apache, IIS, > any of them. You'll see the same thing. > > The fact is, no software is fool-proof. I was in CFQA and > Development helping to work on CFMX, I know we ran this puppy through > every little test you could think of. > > Does this mean the software is bulletproof? No. > > So, now you have some software you buy, and you have a problem. > Do you send operating systems back when you run into an issue? Do you > take a car back and ask for a refund if you find out a window is acting > funny? > > No, you go and get the issue resolved. My issue is that we > cannot work on issues we cannot recreate in house. Let me give you a > typical thread: > > User: CFMX suckxx! > Someone else: What are you seeing? > User: Stuff! > Someone else: OoooKay... What sort of stuff > User: Stuff that makes the server crash! > > While Matt just sent a message decrying public communication > between those of us at Macromedia and the community, how can we possibly > work on bugs and issues that are reduced to "stuff is broken". > > I can't recreate "stuff is broken". I can recreate "If I run > Code X the server crashes under this OS, version and patch level". > > Our primary method of recreating and debugging issues is an > escalation through technical support. That's why they are there. > > Technical support is the first line, they get the ducks in a row > to allow development and QA to create a fully functional test case in > house so that we can actually FIND the problem. > > Going through support also assures that the problem will be > fixed within a reasonable amount of time. > > Are we working on fixing bugs? Yes. Could we have missed you > bug? Yes. Are we working on recreating some of the problem pointed out > on the mailing lists and forums? Yes. > > How are supposed to communicate that? How can we publically say > "We are working on a bug from the forums that 50 users are seeing" it's > a matter of "firestorms" if 1 user sees it, it's a fact of life that > unless it is properly escalated (through support), it may not be looked > at for some time, however, if 50 users say "yeah, we see X under Y > conditions" it will more than likely be fixed more quickly. > > Sorry for the pseudo rant, but there seems to be a misconception > on the reason why technical support is actually there, they are the > pipeline to development, and to actually getting bugs fixed. Not the > forums, not the Mailing lists. > > While many of us internally may read these mediums, and watch > for "trends" the "smaller" issues slip through the cracks. This is a > problem of not only manpower (as it would take an army to sort through > the data). But also resources. That's why support it there. > > I highly recommend, if you are seeing an issue, to contact > technical support, period. They are the best bet of you seeing your > issue included in the next updater, or getting a custom patch. > > > Jesse Noller > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Macromedia Server Development > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Lee Fuller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2002 9:48 AM > > To: CF-Talk > > Subject: RE: LONG time CF Supporter - About ready to dump CF! > > > > Yes. But that's really not the point. > > > > I know you're just a "messenger" Jesse.. So I'm not trying to slay > > you. But understand that many of us who support CF had to go to our > > superiors and convince them to spend quite a bit of cash to support CF > > > in the firt place. Then, after convincing them that it's a good > > thing, they're now seeing their investment turn into more expense for > > man-hours, customers jumping ship because of the lack of stability, > > customers simply blowing off CF because it's become (and I'm quoting > > at least three clients here) "...too bloated to hassle with any > > more.", etc, etc. > > > > Now I'm being asked to go back these same people, who are now > > SERIOUSLY questioning why they allowed us to talk them into spending > > money on this beast, and ask them to allow me to use the company > > credit card to (even > > potentially) pay for a problem that would simply go away with a quick > > flick of a mouse button over an "uninstall" file? > > > > I'm being told that they are thinking about simply sending back the > > software and asking for a refund. Now, color me silly but that > > doesn't sound like people who will support my asking for a credit card > > > to secure ANYTHING but maybe the freight to ship the discs, manual and > > > box back to Macromedia. > > > > Again.. Don't get me wrong. I'm a HUGE fan of the CF technology.. > > TRULY! We've been CF supporters since 1.0. That's why this all seems > > > so sad and frustrating. We've watched CF go from "no brainer -- > > fantastic technology!" to "OH MY GOD.. IT'S DOWN **AGAIN**?? > > WHY????!!! And they want MORE MONEY TO FIX IT???!!!" > > > > So you can see, it's a bit of a bad position I'm in. > > > > > > > > | -----Original Message----- > > | From: Jesse Noller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > | Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2002 6:38 AM > > | To: CF-Talk > > | Subject: RE: LONG time CF Supporter - About ready to dump CF! > > | > > | > > | They asked for a credit card number to secure an amount unless it is > > > | a bug in CFMX, correct? > > | > > | Jesse Noller > > | [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > | Macromedia Server Development > > | > > | > -----Original Message----- > > | > From: Lee Fuller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > | > Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2002 9:36 AM > > | > To: CF-Talk > > | > Subject: RE: LONG time CF Supporter - About ready to dump CF! > > | > > > | > Yup... And (per my post) they've asked for support $ to > > | figure it out. > > | > > > | > | I'm assuming you've made your problems known to Macromedia? > > | > > > | > > > | > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/cf_talk FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm
