I would agree, and would hate to see many of those features go away. However, many of the marketing claims I've heard is that you can put the generated class files on any "supported" J2EE engine and they'll run. In other words, they make it sound as if I can take my class files generated on a Win32 box and move them anywhere I want - even on a machine without CF. I simply cannot see how this is true. Maybe I'm a bit too caught up in the whole truth in advertising thing. :-) (Of course, they're not really advertising - more like a buzz-word-orama festival)
----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave Watts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2002 10:56 AM Subject: RE: CF6 & true J2EE Compliance (was Re: Macromedia.com) > > If it's true J2EE, it should be portable across all J2EE > > platforms. Of course, you'll notice that they in the initial > > public Neo info that they are only supporting a limited set of > > J2EE engines (interestingly enough, all of them are commercial > > products - even though there are a number of open-source J2EE > > products that are fully compliant). I doubt that CF6 will be > > true J2EE, which is rather unfortunate. > > I think you're reading too much into this. I suspect that it will, in fact, > be portable, and that will a little tweaking, you'll be able to get it > running on Tomcat/Jakarta. However, there are enough implementation details, > such as how installers work, which strike me as potentially complex. As for > their support of commercial platforms first, that makes perfect sense to me > - they can take advantage of IBM and BEA for setup support and development > issues, rather than doing all the work themselves. > > > I've never gotten a straight answer as to how they can > > support things like CFObject yet still be compliant. Sun > > sued (and won) Microsoft for bastardizing the Java spec. > > J2EE compliance doesn't mean that you can't implement additional features. > Every commercial J2EE server does this - there's stuff in BEA WebLogic that > facilitates Tuxedo connectivity, I think. J2EE compliance simply means that > all of the stuff within the J2EE specification has been implemented. > > The comparison with Microsoft is flawed - Microsoft was sued by Sun over the > fact that they built platform-specific features into the Java language > itself - into the VM and compiler. There's nothing to stop a vendor from > building functionality into a Java application beyond what Java itself > provides - that's the purpose behind native interfaces like JNI. > > Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software > http://www.figleaf.com/ > voice: (202) 797-5496 > fax: (202) 797-5444 > ______________________________________________________________________ Get Your Own Dedicated Windows 2000 Server PIII 800 / 256 MB RAM / 40 GB HD / 20 GB MO/XFER Instant Activation · $99/Month · Free Setup http://www.pennyhost.com/redirect.cfm?adcode=coldfusionb FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
