to date. I've still got a couple Fusebox 4 apps that are running beta
cores, because I don't want/need to update them. I've also got apps running
CF4.5 servers that have no need of CFMX or even CF5 functions.
You're absolutely right that keeping an app up to date on a framework is
expensive, but it's also frequently unneccessary, so the cost is irrelevant.
Cheers,
barneyb
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stacy Young [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, February 09, 2004 1:07 PM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: RE: Macromedia.com running on top of Mach II
>
> ...and if you changed the road configuration between every visit would
> it take longer for an American visitor to get where they're going?
>
> I'm not saying the 'average joe' is not capable...I'm suggesting there
> are additional costs associated with constantly dealing with changing
> frameworks.
>
>
>
> -Stace
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 09 February 2004 14:33
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: RE: Macromedia.com running on top of Mach II
>
> > > I hear this "secret sauce" argument all the time and
> > > frankly think it is without merit. I have never walked
> > > into an organization and had trouble hitting the ground
> > > running because I had never seen the methodology,
> > > framework, or style in use at that organization.
> >
> > [stacy] There's a big difference between you and an average
> > developer getting up to speed on grunt work in a web app
> > though. ;)
>
> It's been my experience that most average, competent developers have
> no
> trouble with those issues either, just as American visitors
> to England
> have
> little trouble remembering to drive on the other side of the road.
>
> Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software
> http://www.figleaf.com/
> phone: 202-797-5496
> fax: 202-797-5444
>
> _____
>
>
>
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
