Actually PRO standard supports web site quite well, unless you want separate instantiations for each site. But Blue Dragon is coming right along, and I expect to see its adoption for smaller sites start spreading.
On the other hand, from a server standpoint, there are costs other than software licensing. Deployment and connectivity are no small items to consider, In our operation, we prefer not to load up a shared server with tons and tons of web sites. but prefer to spread them over several servers, which will enhance performance for each hosted site. ====================================== Stop spam on your domain, use our gateway! For hosting solutions http://www.clickdoug.com Featuring Win2003 Enterprise, RedHat Linux, CFMX 6.1 and all databases. ISP rated: http://www.forta.com/cf/isp/isp.cfm?isp_id=772 Suggested corporate Anti-virus policy: http://www.dshield.org/antivirus.pdf ====================================== If you are not satisfied with my service, my job isn't done! ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ryan Kime" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2003 10:13 AM Subject: RE: DWMX 2004 - Whats new for us? | "There's no such thing as a free lunch" | | I would be leery of *free* CF and SQL Server, both of those cost a pretty | penny and are not easy to cover without passing some of the cost on to | customers. It also makes me wonder why they use the term "FREE" and not | "included" when describing their plans. | | Which version of CF are they using? If it's Pro/Standard and not Enterprise, | don't walk, but run away as fast as you can. | | Ryan | | -----Original Message----- | From: Bryan Stevenson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2003 9:55 AM | To: CF-Talk | Subject: Re: DWMX 2004 - Whats new for us? | | | Hey All, | | Just thought I'd chime in here. | | I've seen a lot of folks mentioning BlueDragon and how it may bring down | hosting costs for CF. Well I'm not sure about the US, but CF is starting to | be offered for NO EXTRA CHARGE up here in Canada. | | www.uniserve.com for example (and there are others). | | NT Hosting with SQL Server 2000 and CFMX in a shared environment for about | $35 CDN/month and they rock!! I've used the company they recently acquired | (Axion Internet) for the past 5 years and the service only got better after | the merger. Beleive it or not the SQL Server does not even add any monthly | cost...just a $25 CDN setup fee!! | | So while BD may help bring other ISPs down to earth.....that move is already | happening here ;-) | | Cheers | | Bryan Stevenson B.Comm. | VP & Director of E-Commerce Development | Electric Edge Systems Group Inc. | t. 250.920.8830 | e. [EMAIL PROTECTED] | | --------------------------------------------------------- | Macromedia Associate Partner | www.macromedia.com | --------------------------------------------------------- | Vancouver Island ColdFusion Users Group | Founder & Director | www.cfug-vancouverisland.com | ----- Original Message ----- | From: "Jim Davis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2003 6:54 PM | Subject: RE: DWMX 2004 - Whats new for us? | | | > For me, I wouldn't at the moment just because I'm very happy where I | > am (CrystalTech). | > | > However BlueDragon has the definite potential to bring CF hosting | > prices down significantly (one of the complaints I here about CF) so I | > would really like to see it offered by a few hosts. | > | > As Vince pointed out in a branch from this thread BlueDragon also | > makes excellent sense for somebody that wants to package their CF | > application for use on a server lacking CF (which can be in either | > J2EE or, soon, .NET). | > | > Although this market has traditionally been very small with CF Blue | > Dragon may expand it greatly. | > | > Jim Davis | > | > > -----Original Message----- | > > From: Mike Brunt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | > > Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2003 11:28 AM | > > To: CF-Talk | > > Subject: RE: DWMX 2004 - Whats new for us? | > > | > > There is another question in the whole Bluedragon debate. How many | > > of | > us | > > would move our site(s) to a hosting company using BD instead of MM | > > ColdFusion? | > > | > > Kind Regards - Mike Brunt | > > Webapper Services LLC | > > Web Site http://www.webapper.com | > > Blog http://www.webapper.net | > > | > > Webapper <Web Application Specialists> | > > | > > -----Original Message----- | > > From: Jim Davis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | > > Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2003 7:56 AM | > > To: CF-Talk | > > Subject: RE: DWMX 2004 - Whats new for us? | > > | > > > -----Original Message----- | > > > From: Matt Liotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | > > > Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2003 2:16 AM | > > > To: CF-Talk | > > > Subject: Re: DWMX 2004 - Whats new for us? | > > > | > > > > If your clients are small enough where the cost of CF is | > prohibitive | > > it | > > > > may be likely that the cost of managing an Intranet is also | > > prohibitive | > > > > (although they may be doing it anyway and have never done a cost | > > > > analysis). | > > > > | > > > I'll agree with that, but certainly the use of certain software | > > > e.g. | > > CF | > > > could be what tips the scale. If that is the case, then a cheaper | > > > implementation of CFML (BlueDragon) can certainly help in that | > regard. | > > | > > It definitely has an effect, but in most cases (and certainly not in | > > CF's case) the cost of software is very small compared to | > > maintenance and general infrastructure costs. | > > | > > Even managing a small, single Intranet server using free software | > > can | > be | > > (often surprisingly) very costly once you do a full resource | > > map/prediction - especially when extended to the life of the server. | > > | > > All that being said every little bit does help. ;^) If software | > costs | > > are lower then you total project costs COULD definitely be lower | > > (but often aren't due to other factors not commonly taken into | > > account). | > > | > > > > Many hosting companies are hosting their Intranet at "public" | > hosts | > > for | > > > > this reason. There are some hosts that do nothing but | > > > > traditional Intranet applications along with email (Exchange | > > > > hosting, for | > > example, | > > > > is pretty common due to the cost and complexity of managing an | > > Exchange | > > > > server). | > > > > | > > > That may be, but there are serious issues with outsourcing | > > > internal | > IT | > > > resources externally that many of these companies may not be aware | > of. | > > > One example of this is that their WAN connection becomes a single | > > point | > > > of failure. Then of course there are legality issues related to | > giving | > > > non-employees access to sensitive data that aren't under specific | > > > consulting agreements, which is the case when your email is hosted | > by | > > a | > > > 3rd party. | > > | > > All true - this all depends, of course, on how much the company | > > wants | > to | > > spend as well. If you want to get away more cheaply you'll be | > > sacrificing some things. A full "bullet-proof" system will always | > cost | > > more. | > > | > > > > No, consider an Intranet with is planned to contain, let's say, | > six | > > > > distinct applications (not at all uncommon). My case now is | > > > > that | > > each | > > > > of these applications only has to save two hours of development | > time | > > > > due | > > > > to CF for it to be just as cost effective as a "free" solution. | > > > > | > > > Of course, the case with BlueDragon would only need to save one | > > > hour per application. | > > | > > True. I'm not arguing against Blue Dragon but rather the concept | > > that software costs (at this level) are major considerations. Too | > > many | > times | > > I've heard "we can't afford CF" only to watch a company spends | > thousands | > > more pursuing an untried "free" solution. | > > | > > The problem here is almost always one of training and applicability. | > A | > > company that has great Linux/PostGres/PHP people will, of course, | > > use them. But a company looking for a solution often gravitates to | > > free software due to cost concerns. | > > | > > Developers are then in the position of learning these tools as they | > > develop - which ends up costing far, far more in the long run than | > > setting up, for example, a Windows environment that they may have | > > some experience with. | > > | > > For a medium/large company this isn't a problem as the extra time | > > can | > be | > > split with R&D/Training and down the road you do gain. But for the | > very | > > small company this often locks them into a money-pit; tying them | > > into | > a | > > solution they don't know and resulting either in a failed project or | > one | > > that doesn't meet expectations. | > > | > > Many of them are roped in by contractors that claim they can "pick | > > up" something easily. My advice to small business is always stick | > > with | > what | > > you know and always pay extra for gurus. | > > | > > Jim Davis | > > | > > | > > | > > | > | | ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm?link=t:4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm?link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com
