> but there is no particular magic about it - all the RoR things can be done in > CF
but Robin, the reverse of that is true too. - all the CF things can be done in RonR. Where's the product differentiation? and now, that includes remoting, which was one selling point I was using in flying the CF flag. Previously, remoting for Java or .NET from Macromedia was almost as expensive as a CF licence so it made sence to have your remoting back end as CF. I find it disquieting that WebOrb are giving remoting for Ruby away for nothing, making it open source to encourage the community to run with it. why _shouldn't_ that be such a big deal? look how far the Red5 ppl have come... RubyOnRails on one side. CF (with Model-glue:unity) on the other so far the strongest arguments for CF are the suggestions of Community support Vs mothership Adobe and that RonR is too new to find developers under every rock. is that all there is? I've beeen trying to use Flex as a trojan horse to sneak in CF (well, a CF7 upgrade): Adobe wants to make CF a "first Class citizen for Flex" how? where's the "meat"? only with the ability to map CFC's to AS classes? and how long before there's a Ruby wizard to cover that? Grant Straker presented (at a webDU) an interesting view about selling the Macromedia (at the time) "Vision". Don't bore managers with irrelivant technical details, leverage what the company has done and where it was heading. Then, that made sence. But I see that vision fractured in the push by Adobe to reach out to all platforms. I'm stopping short in saying that Adobe should be actively protecting/restricting the AMF3 protocol to provide an advantage to their products like CF. I hate that heavy microsoft-type aproach. Instead, I'm asking what Adobe can learn from RonR? you and I both know of the turn-key app I was working on where it was written for CF7 standard - not enterprise, even if we could have really used the gateways. Bottom line: enterprise licence costs, no matter how hard things were juggled (partner prices, bulk licences, etc). there seems to be a nasty pro/anti open source debate that CF is caught up in yet again. Last time it was with PHP, but this time, the "teeth" seem sharper... so, compared to this latest onslaught, where's the compelling reasons? What will make me say, "yeah, I can sell that..." ? last point: Microsoft doesn't have to release a technology roadmap because everyone knows how the story goes: a two pronged attack starting at the file server on one side and the SOe and MSOffice on the other. >From there it's Outlook, Exchange, SQLServer, Sharepoint, Project Server and whatever bloated overpriced product they've sucked ITO's into buying subscriptions for. but where's Adobe's roadmap? and more importantly, where's CF's place in it? Will people care if there's livecycle integration in CF? what else is there... that no one else has? It's time for those that say that the Emperor has magnificent clothes to state what @[EMAIL PROTECTED]@ colour they are... On 8/31/06, Robin Hilliard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 30/08/2006, at 3:24 PM, Mark Stanton wrote: > > > > Hi Andrew > > > >> I still see RoR the same as ModleGlue. > > > > Here is the rails API documentation: http://api.rubyonrails.com/ > > > > If you take the ColdSpring, MG, Reactor and CFAjax + big chunks of the > > CF language (where CF is abstracting away tricky stuff like queries, > > mail, includes, custom tags, etc..) you'll end up with something like > > Rails. > > A lot of the things in the rails docco (e.g. controllers, view > helpers) were also mentioned in my presso at Webdu. > > One point that no-one has mentioned yet: CF runs as Java bytecode, > on a VM which both Sun and IBM have spent 100s of millions of > development dollars optimising over the last decade. This was the > whole point of the MX release. Ruby still runs in it's own > proprietary interpreter (hmm, kind of like... CF <= 5) which is a > fair bit slower (although you can write high performance code in any > language with appropriate caching etc, and most of the 37Signals RoR > apps at least are very fast). > > As I have stated publicly elsewhere I think Ruby is a great language > (and it's use of mixins for it's libraries too), and RoR is a > sensible web app framework, but there is no particular magic about it > - all the RoR things can be done in CF and in fact are being done > under the auspices of various existing CF frameworks, but the ever > present CF cultural cringe factor tends to make the community think > that somehow good patterns, frameworks etc only happen to other > platforms... > > ______________ > > Robin Hilliard > > > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "cfaussie" group. To post to this group, send email to cfaussie@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cfaussie -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
