RE: Microsoft acknowledges CF!
> What do you mean by shallow support? There's a good deal of Java that simply can't be used directly from within CF. A lack of support for null values is a big reason. There's also a good deal that requires workarounds or hacks. It's certainly possible to use a lot of Java from within CF, but it requires 1) knowing a second language and 2) knowing Java well enough to be able to workaround the implementation details. In contrast, Visual Basic, Jscript and C# are all first class .Net languages. This means that they can treat anything in the .Net Framework as a native object (with a few exceptions). So, a VB programmer doesn't have to learn a new language to implement something in the .Net Framework. > Honestly I almost never used Java in > CF since CF has almost everything I ever needed. I agree for the most part. I can program most Web sites completely in ColdFusion, and in most cases that is perfectly reasonable. However, for example, there are many times where it would be preferable to use a data type other than a struct or an array. I can now create my own data types using CFCs, but that's not nearly as nice as having every common (and some not so common) data types pre-built for me. My point isn't that I can't do most of what I need to in ColdFusion. It's just that the old arguments no longer apply. It used to be the case that ColdFusion offered an environment that was much richer than other competing platforms such as ASP. I do not believe this to be the case anymore. I believe ColdFusion is on par with most other platforms and that it offers most of the functionality that I need to develop most Web applications without resorting to coding COM objects or Java classes, or purchasing third party components. As a side note, the biggest notable exception from my perspective is image manipulation. I'd love some native image tags. I'm hoping that the jimg tag off the resource kit makes it into the next release of ColdFusion. > Once should also look at > what is needed, not what can be done. Sure C#.Net offers a lot, but you > only really need a fraction of that for the web. I only need a fraction for any given Web site, yes. However, I need different pieces for different Web sites. In some Web sites, image manipulation is a big deal. In others, COM interoperability is important. -ben [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Microsoft acknowledges CF!
I think you can do this a few different ways, but essentially you still need a local application server to execute the pages. With CFMX you could use the developer copy which I think is free for localhost usage. BD offers a free version that I think is only CF5 compatible. Maybe I'm wrong. Coral offers a standalone server specifically for this reason. It has a shorter list of tags/functions but a few new ones that are specific to local applications. http://www.pcaonline.com/coral/index.cfm Steve _ From: Tom Kitta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, May 10, 2004 11:02 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Microsoft acknowledges CF! Is there a way to use CF code outside of a server, stand alone executable (without any server like software including that mini server offered for presentation purposes)? In other words can I "compile" a cf page and save it in cgi directory? I am just curious since now CF page is compiled before it executes, could code compiled by CF server be used? TK -Original Message- From: Bernd VanSkiver [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, May 10, 2004 10:44 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Microsoft acknowledges CF! One thing nice about the .NET Framework is that if an application is designed well it is easy (fairly) to make it available in many formats (web site, windows app, pocket pc app), I think that is one of the reasons it is built like it is. It is nice to have that ability to port the software to different platforms easily like that, just have to change the UI and everything else works the same. ASP.NET is definitely better then classic ASP, but CF still has better and easier coding. Just like everyone has said, CF is the best thing I have seen yet for getting information in and out of a database. Bernd VanSkiver [EMAIL PROTECTED] 801.520.5957 -Original Message- From: Tom Kitta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, May 10, 2004 8:26 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Microsoft acknowledges CF! What do you mean by shallow support? Honestly I almost never used Java in CF since CF has almost everything I ever needed. Once should also look at what is needed, not what can be done. Sure C#.Net offers a lot, but you only really need a fraction of that for the web. The specialization of a language is good thing, the stripping down of C/C++ into C# is all about that. However, in my opinion, they don't much CF specialization. TK -Original Message- From: Benjamin S. Rogers [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, May 10, 2004 10:11 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Microsoft acknowledges CF! When comparing CF to classic ASP, this was true. However, the .Net framework provides a much richer environment. You're no longer limited so a small number of VBScript or JScript functions. To a certain extent, you can achieve this in CF with Java. However, CF's Java support is relatively shallow. Additionally, it requires knowing a second, much more complicated language. In contrast, VB, Jscript, and C# are all first class .Net languages. You can utilize just about anything in the .Net framework. -ben _ [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Microsoft acknowledges CF!
Ignore... just a subscription test msg.. [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Microsoft acknowledges CF!
> From: Tom Kitta > > Is there a way to use CF code outside of a server, stand > alone executable (without any server like software including > that mini server offered for presentation purposes)? In other > words can I "compile" a cf page and save it in cgi directory? > I am just curious since now CF page is compiled before it > executes, could code compiled by CF server be used? CFMX natually compiles it's code into Java classes, but I don't think these are transportable to another "stand alone" machine I believe BlueDragon does something towards this though [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Microsoft acknowledges CF!
Is there a way to use CF code outside of a server, stand alone executable (without any server like software including that mini server offered for presentation purposes)? In other words can I "compile" a cf page and save it in cgi directory? I am just curious since now CF page is compiled before it executes, could code compiled by CF server be used? TK -Original Message- From: Bernd VanSkiver [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, May 10, 2004 10:44 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Microsoft acknowledges CF! One thing nice about the .NET Framework is that if an application is designed well it is easy (fairly) to make it available in many formats (web site, windows app, pocket pc app), I think that is one of the reasons it is built like it is. It is nice to have that ability to port the software to different platforms easily like that, just have to change the UI and everything else works the same. ASP.NET is definitely better then classic ASP, but CF still has better and easier coding. Just like everyone has said, CF is the best thing I have seen yet for getting information in and out of a database. Bernd VanSkiver [EMAIL PROTECTED] 801.520.5957 -Original Message- From: Tom Kitta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, May 10, 2004 8:26 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Microsoft acknowledges CF! What do you mean by shallow support? Honestly I almost never used Java in CF since CF has almost everything I ever needed. Once should also look at what is needed, not what can be done. Sure C#.Net offers a lot, but you only really need a fraction of that for the web. The specialization of a language is good thing, the stripping down of C/C++ into C# is all about that. However, in my opinion, they don't much CF specialization. TK -Original Message- From: Benjamin S. Rogers [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, May 10, 2004 10:11 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Microsoft acknowledges CF! When comparing CF to classic ASP, this was true. However, the .Net framework provides a much richer environment. You're no longer limited so a small number of VBScript or JScript functions. To a certain extent, you can achieve this in CF with Java. However, CF's Java support is relatively shallow. Additionally, it requires knowing a second, much more complicated language. In contrast, VB, Jscript, and C# are all first class .Net languages. You can utilize just about anything in the .Net framework. -ben [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Microsoft acknowledges CF!
One thing nice about the .NET Framework is that if an application is designed well it is easy (fairly) to make it available in many formats (web site, windows app, pocket pc app), I think that is one of the reasons it is built like it is. It is nice to have that ability to port the software to different platforms easily like that, just have to change the UI and everything else works the same. ASP.NET is definitely better then classic ASP, but CF still has better and easier coding. Just like everyone has said, CF is the best thing I have seen yet for getting information in and out of a database. Bernd VanSkiver [EMAIL PROTECTED] 801.520.5957 -Original Message- From: Tom Kitta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, May 10, 2004 8:26 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Microsoft acknowledges CF! What do you mean by shallow support? Honestly I almost never used Java in CF since CF has almost everything I ever needed. Once should also look at what is needed, not what can be done. Sure C#.Net offers a lot, but you only really need a fraction of that for the web. The specialization of a language is good thing, the stripping down of C/C++ into C# is all about that. However, in my opinion, they don't much CF specialization. TK -Original Message- From: Benjamin S. Rogers [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, May 10, 2004 10:11 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Microsoft acknowledges CF! When comparing CF to classic ASP, this was true. However, the .Net framework provides a much richer environment. You're no longer limited so a small number of VBScript or JScript functions. To a certain extent, you can achieve this in CF with Java. However, CF's Java support is relatively shallow. Additionally, it requires knowing a second, much more complicated language. In contrast, VB, Jscript, and C# are all first class .Net languages. You can utilize just about anything in the .Net framework. -ben [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Microsoft acknowledges CF!
What do you mean by shallow support? Honestly I almost never used Java in CF since CF has almost everything I ever needed. Once should also look at what is needed, not what can be done. Sure C#.Net offers a lot, but you only really need a fraction of that for the web. The specialization of a language is good thing, the stripping down of C/C++ into C# is all about that. However, in my opinion, they don't much CF specialization. TK -Original Message- From: Benjamin S. Rogers [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, May 10, 2004 10:11 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Microsoft acknowledges CF! When comparing CF to classic ASP, this was true. However, the .Net framework provides a much richer environment. You're no longer limited so a small number of VBScript or JScript functions. To a certain extent, you can achieve this in CF with Java. However, CF's Java support is relatively shallow. Additionally, it requires knowing a second, much more complicated language. In contrast, VB, Jscript, and C# are all first class .Net languages. You can utilize just about anything in the .Net framework. -ben [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Microsoft acknowledges CF!
> They also only talked about the general functionality of CF. There are so > many built in functions in CF that I think we all take for granted because > they've been in there so long. Things like manipulating lists, queries, > dates, display formatting. The list of CF's *real development benefits, > IMHO, is huge. But these things are never discussed in comparisons with > other languages. When comparing CF to classic ASP, this was true. However, the .Net framework provides a much richer environment. You're no longer limited so a small number of VBScript or JScript functions. To a certain extent, you can achieve this in CF with Java. However, CF's Java support is relatively shallow. Additionally, it requires knowing a second, much more complicated language. In contrast, VB, Jscript, and C# are all first class .Net languages. You can utilize just about anything in the .Net framework. -ben [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Microsoft acknowledges CF!
I have done some ASP coding -- mainly converting programs to CF. Not only is a lot more work (in ASP) to put together a SQL query, there are a lot of things to keep track of -- if you forget to close the connection it can affect performance, etc, Number of lines is not everything -- but a more compact, concise procedure is easier to understand. Also, CF tags tend to be less granular, less cryptic (more self-documenting) -- this is significant in maintaining the code over time. Dick On May 10, 2004, at 6:33 AM, Pete Ruckelshaus - CFList wrote: > The one thing that still sticks out to me (I went from ASP to CF almost > 5 years ago) is just how much more difficult database interaction is > when you're not using CF. I also explicitly DON'T like the > presentation > layer control that the display objects take away; that's fine if > you're > a developer with no HTML skills, but for us designer/developer/control > freak types, it's pretty annoying. > > Pete > > Raymond Camden wrote: > > You know, I'm probably biased, but you have to love the fact that > almost > > every code comparison shows CF having about half the lines .Net > does. I like > > .Net, a lot, and yes, we all know the # of lines isn't the most > important > > thing in the world, but it was funny how much this stood out, > especially in > > the DB examples. [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Microsoft acknowledges CF!
Boy isn't that the truth! They also only talked about the general functionality of CF. There are so many built in functions in CF that I think we all take for granted because they've been in there so long. Things like manipulating lists, queries, dates, display formatting. The list of CF's *real development benefits, IMHO, is huge. But these things are never discussed in comparisons with other languages. Steve _ From: Raymond Camden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, May 10, 2004 9:17 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Microsoft acknowledges CF! You know, I'm probably biased, but you have to love the fact that almost every code comparison shows CF having about half the lines .Net does. I like .Net, a lot, and yes, we all know the # of lines isn't the most important thing in the world, but it was funny how much this stood out, especially in the DB examples. _ [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Microsoft acknowledges CF!
The one thing that still sticks out to me (I went from ASP to CF almost 5 years ago) is just how much more difficult database interaction is when you're not using CF. I also explicitly DON'T like the presentation layer control that the display objects take away; that's fine if you're a developer with no HTML skills, but for us designer/developer/control freak types, it's pretty annoying. Pete Raymond Camden wrote: > You know, I'm probably biased, but you have to love the fact that almost > every code comparison shows CF having about half the lines .Net does. I like > .Net, a lot, and yes, we all know the # of lines isn't the most important > thing in the world, but it was funny how much this stood out, especially in > the DB examples. > > > > [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Microsoft acknowledges CF!
You know, I'm probably biased, but you have to love the fact that almost every code comparison shows CF having about half the lines .Net does. I like .Net, a lot, and yes, we all know the # of lines isn't the most important thing in the world, but it was funny how much this stood out, especially in the DB examples. [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Microsoft acknowledges CF!
On Friday 07 May 2004 22:50 pm, Andrew Spear wrote: > http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=""> >l/coldfusiontoaspnet.asp I guess MS will be buying CF now then... :-) -- Tom Chiverton Advanced ColdFusion Programmer Tel: +44(0)1749 834997 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] BlueFinger Limited Underwood Business Park Wookey Hole Road, WELLS. BA5 1AF Tel: +44 (0)1749 834900 Fax: +44 (0)1749 834901 web: www.bluefinger.com Company Reg No: 4209395 Registered Office: 2 Temple Back East, Temple Quay, BRISTOL. BS1 6EG. *** This E-mail contains confidential information for the addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify us immediately. You should not use, disclose, distribute or copy this communication if received in error. No binding contract will result from this e-mail until such time as a written document is signed on behalf of the company. BlueFinger Limited cannot accept responsibility for the completeness or accuracy of this message as it has been transmitted over public networks.*** [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Microsoft acknowledges CF!
I gave this article a rating of 9 (outstanding). In my comment I told them the article had me convinced... to stick with ColdFusion. Steve Nelson _ From: Andrew Spear [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, May 07, 2004 5:51 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Microsoft acknowledges CF! I thought some of you might find this interesting. http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=""> /coldfusiontoaspnet.asp Andrew _ [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Microsoft acknowledges CF!
I am in the middle of converting all of our ColdFusion apps to .NET. Our old management was replaced with new management who are all about .NET and could give a rip about CF. While this is giving me an opportunity to learn a new skill set (if you call shoving technology down your throat being 'given' the opportunity), I am learning that .NET is a very convoluted way to get something done compared to CF. A co-worker put it this way, 'it is like taking a taxi to go across the street'. I know there has been CF vs. .NET discussions before and I am not looking to start a new one, I am just venting. I for one will always use CF when developing a new site for any new clients. Although I can make more money using .NET (only because it takes longer to do something), I will continue to use CF and save my clients money. I figure that if I keep costs down and quality of work high, I stand a better chance of getting repeat business and more importantly, more referrals. _ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, May 08, 2004 8:14 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: Microsoft acknowledges CF! > I thought some of you might find this interesting. > > http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default. > asp?url=""> I read this quite a while ago when it first came out, and the biggest annoyance to me is that they seem to pick and choose which version of CF they refer to in order to best suit their purposes. The fact that they talk about CF being based on Java (MX of course) and then turn around and say there is no real way to separate business logic from presentation (which doesn't take into account CFCs and seriously downplays custom tags) is my biggest problem with the article. I've done a couple of .NET projects (C#) and I can tell you that although there are some good things about .NET (some of the front-end controls would be a nice addition to CF), there is still absolutely no comparison from a productivity and ease of coding level, unless perhaps you're using Visual Studio. Since I'm on a Mac and was only doing a few projects I wasn't about to shell out the money for Visual Studio, so to me if the language itself needs a tool in order to make you even reasonably productive compared to CF, that's a weakness of the language, not a strength of the tool. Anyway--end of rant. I do think that while MS is acknowledging CF in this way, Macromedia really needs to be aware of what .NET has to offer (and I'm sure they have people keeping close tabs on this). The ease of coding with CF plus some of the nice front-end controls of .NET would be a very powerful combination. Matt _ [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Microsoft acknowledges CF!
> I thought some of you might find this interesting. > > http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default. > asp?url=""> I read this quite a while ago when it first came out, and the biggest annoyance to me is that they seem to pick and choose which version of CF they refer to in order to best suit their purposes. The fact that they talk about CF being based on Java (MX of course) and then turn around and say there is no real way to separate business logic from presentation (which doesn't take into account CFCs and seriously downplays custom tags) is my biggest problem with the article. I've done a couple of .NET projects (C#) and I can tell you that although there are some good things about .NET (some of the front-end controls would be a nice addition to CF), there is still absolutely no comparison from a productivity and ease of coding level, unless perhaps you're using Visual Studio. Since I'm on a Mac and was only doing a few projects I wasn't about to shell out the money for Visual Studio, so to me if the language itself needs a tool in order to make you even reasonably productive compared to CF, that's a weakness of the language, not a strength of the tool. Anyway--end of rant. I do think that while MS is acknowledging CF in this way, Macromedia really needs to be aware of what .NET has to offer (and I'm sure they have people keeping close tabs on this). The ease of coding with CF plus some of the nice front-end controls of .NET would be a very powerful combination. Matt [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Microsoft acknowledges CF!
Very interesting.. I am some what surprised that CF is not "bashed" too bad in the article. I find it sorta funny that some the CF examples use several line breaks to show one tag. Thus making the CF code block seem almost as long as the asp code block. But a surprisingly fair comparison. But, we all know that CF is always the best tool for the job. Mark W. Breneman -Cold Fusion Developer -Network Administrator Vivid Media [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.vividmedia.com 608.270.9770 _ From: Andrew Spear [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, May 07, 2004 4:51 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Microsoft acknowledges CF! I thought some of you might find this interesting. http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=""> /coldfusiontoaspnet.asp Andrew _ [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Microsoft acknowledges CF!
> From: Andrew Spear > > I thought some of you might find this interesting. > > http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=""> > us/dnaspp/html/coldfusiontoaspnet.asp Whoever wrote this has some strange knowledge of CF They refer to LESS THAN OR EQUAL TO rather than LTE They also completely ignore CFTABLE Also ignored is some of the CFSCRIPT control, like looping and switch where they do it in CF tags But at least they show ASP.NET's downfall compared to CF's charting and Search Engine [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Microsoft acknowledges CF!
This article was there for a while now. I think it is based on CFMX 6.0. It was there before the release of windows server 2003. TK -Original Message- From: Andrew Spear [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, May 07, 2004 5:51 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Microsoft acknowledges CF! I thought some of you might find this interesting. http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=""> /coldfusiontoaspnet.asp Andrew [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Microsoft acknowledges CF!
Shall we have a contest to see who can identify the most mistakes/inaccuracies/mis-representations in their comparison? :) Ken From: Andrew Spear [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Fri 5/7/2004 5:50 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Microsoft acknowledges CF! I thought some of you might find this interesting. http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=""> Andrew [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Microsoft acknowledges CF!
Second sentence of the article: "Is there any functionality missing in the target system that might require the purchase of third-party components?" -- --- Matt Robertson, [EMAIL PROTECTED] MSB Designs, Inc. http://mysecretbase.com --- -- [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
