> -----Original Message-----
> From: C. Hatton Humphrey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
> On all 4 servers I've seen one similariaty: If you load the
> server down too badly, or if there is a case where one of the
> 150-200 other sites hosting in a shared environment "blows up".
> If there's something that's going to reduce the hair-loss
> progression of a server admin, then I'm personally all for it.
Given Allaire's past performance and Macromedia's lacking record in the
application server market, I doubt the first release of CF5 will have
anywhere near "enterprise" stability. Nothing but an informed opinion, of
course, but with the snafus surrounding 4.5 (that's a .5 release, not a new
version!) and Allaire's inability/unwillingness to issue timely patches, I
will not rush to recommend shelling out a minimum of 6k per box on an
unproven product from a vendor that's been proven deficient many times.
How many sites can one host on a dual proc CF5 box? How many more sites can
one host on a similar Apache/PHP or IIS/ASP box? PHP4 and ASP are tested,
trusted and well-supported technologies. CF5 is not. Macromedia's arrogance
in assuming that they can shove their new pricing structure down the throats
of those they think are locked into their product is unwarranted and
short-sighted.
> advertising costs money. It's all relative to the importance of
> what you're offering to the customer and where you want to position
> yourself in the market.
True. That's why you might not want to be locked into a solution from a
small-time, unpredictable vendor who tries to compete with some of the
bigger players in an industry where it has no respect, no brand-name
recognition and very little developer support. The next 12-18 months will
show if Macromedia stays commited to ColdFusion and manages to stay in
business. Alienating the small-business market that drives (from what I've
seen) a lot of their sales is not a smart move when most of the "enterprise"
market would not even consider ColdFusion as a viable alternative to
competing technologies.
> As a consumer, yes, I'd be willing to pay $5 or $10 more per
> month in order NOT to have to tie up my hosting provider's tech
> support lines with "It's down again".
I would not. I'd rather host cheaply with a UNIX host offering PHP with once
in a blue moon maintenance reboots or a serious W2k provider running
technologies native to the platform.
> To look at this in another light, how many people have you heard say, "I'm
> not upgrading to (Insert ANY Windows Release here) when it comes out, they
> want too much money for it." A year later they're boasting the
> latest box!
The difference being, of course, that Windows is the dominant platform in
many markets and new versions offer tangible benefits (I'm not talking about
consumer Windows). On the other hand, when deciding to select a platform for
a fresh deployment, Windows loses a lot of its appeal given currently
available alternatives. And so does ColdFusion.
Cheers,
Seva Petrov
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at
http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
