I don't know about all this stuff with Macromedia. I think they are trying
to target the hosting providers because they think they can make money from
them. I think what the real problem is this, will ISP pay more to get these
added benefits. What about cfm-resources.com. Encouraging a whole new breed
of cf developers for nothing. Pablo would have to pay more money for his new
CF5. Who is gonna really be hurt by this? The answer is everyone. Most
developers are getting started by making a small site on a hosting provider.
If these new people don't want to pay even more to program and just go to
ASP, what kind of growth will our field be getting. These new features may
be awesome but if you're charging someone now 12g's because they have 4
processors, when before it was only gonna be 5g's which do you think they
will go with. And also all those hosting sites that charge and have a
subscription. They were expecting to pay no more money for any of these
benefits and now they will. I think Macromedia is kidding themselves when
they think these hosting providers are making thier money off of CF. Most
have done it because the smaller companies couldn't afford to buy CF. So
they stepped up, bought CF, and charged more to do it. So now instead of $50
a month how much will it be for someone like me $70, $80, $90. That's when
I draw the line. Sure Macromedia will get people to buy these new licenses,
but at what cost. I just can't agree with you this time Dave. I know they
have to make money and they have to answer to stock holders, but at least
they should have looked at the field more. I think they are just opening a
whole bowl of worms with this and we all see it because we know what is
going to happen.
Bob Everland
-----Original Message-----
From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Saturday, April 28, 2001 4:51 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: New CF5 Partner Hosting License
> As I keep saying - look what happened to Netscape Navigator
> vis a vis Internet Explorer - Netscape's entire business model
> collapsed it seems because IE was bundled and free. The same
> applies to CF v ASP and to a lesser extent PHP.
I'm not sure what lesson can be drawn from this. CF isn't free, because some
company, with employees and stockholders, makes it. ASP isn't free, in any
meaningful sense, either - just try to download a version for the platform
of your choice, if it isn't Windows. PHP is free because it doesn't come
from a company, and there are no employees and stockholders to satisfy.
There's also no need for the PHP development team to directly satisfy the
PHP user community, although they may certainly want to, given the free time
and resources. But if they don't, none of them will be out of a job, will
they.
So, are you suggesting that the Allaire arm of MM should:
1. discharge everybody providing development and tech support services for
CF,
2. not pay any of those people,
3. fund further development and support from the sales of their ubiquitous
desktop OS (oh, wait a second...)
None of those sound too likely to me.
Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software
http://www.figleaf.com/
voice: (202) 797-5496
fax: (202) 797-5444
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
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
