OK...so I'm still new to Java and I'm wondering about this that I read on New
Atlanta's site:
Only with BlueDragon can you seamlessly redeploy existing CFML applications to
any standard .NET or J2EE platform. Then, natively integrate and extend your
applications using .NET or J2
ent discount applied to the
> retail price.
>
> http://www.macromedia.com/buy/volume_license/vlo/
>
> - Calvin
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Vince Bonfanti [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2005 8:28 PM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: RE: B
Gordon Bennett! Could they not just have "Buy two get 25% off" or something
similar! :OD
-Original Message-
From: Calvin Ward [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 24 March 2005 11:45
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: BlueDragon 6.2/.NET Released!
I think purchasing 2 CFMX 7 Enterprise l
]
Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2005 8:28 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: BlueDragon 6.2/.NET Released!
Thanks, but that price is correct. BlueDragon.NET is considered an
"enterprise" level product, and is priced the same as BlueDragon/J2EE at
$8,999.00 for a 4-CPU server. For reference, a 4-C
The price is listed as 1,2599. It looks better as 12,599.
Aaron
- Original Message -
From: "Vince Bonfanti" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "CF-Talk"
Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2005 12:28 PM
Subject: RE: BlueDragon 6.2/.NET Released!
> Thanks, but that price
ch 23, 2005 8:33 PM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: Re: BlueDragon 6.2/.NET Released!
>
> On the site
>
> http://www.newatlanta.com/products/bluedragon/product_info/pricing.cfm
>
> I noticed it just now too...
>
> Yves
>
>
> On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 20:28:06 -050
AIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thanks, but that price is correct. BlueDragon.NET is considered an
> "enterprise" level product, and is priced the same as BlueDragon/J2EE at
> $8,999.00 for a 4-CPU server. For reference, a 4-CPU license for CFMX 7
> Enterprise is $11,998.00 (about
On the site
http://www.newatlanta.com/products/bluedragon/product_info/pricing.cfm
I noticed it just now too...
Yves
On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 20:28:06 -0500, Vince Bonfanti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thanks, but that price is correct. BlueDragon.NET is considered an
> "
Thanks, but that price is correct. BlueDragon.NET is considered an
"enterprise" level product, and is priced the same as BlueDragon/J2EE at
$8,999.00 for a 4-CPU server. For reference, a 4-CPU license for CFMX 7
Enterprise is $11,998.00 (about 33% more expensive than the equivalent
Hi Vince,
Congrats! Looks like you have a comma in the wrong place for the
price of the 4-cpu .NET server product.
v/r,
Jeff
On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 18:27:18 -0500, Vince Bonfanti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> New Atlanta is pleased to announce the final release of BlueDragon 6.2,
&
New Atlanta is pleased to announce the final release of BlueDragon 6.2,
which is available for immediate download:
http://www.newatlanta.com/products/bluedragon/index.cfm
The major new feature of BlueDragon 6.2 is "BlueDragon 6.2 for the Microsoft
..NET Framework" (BlueDragon.N
or, default, or continue"
http://livedocs.macromedia.com/coldfusion/6.1/htmldocs/express2.htm#wp271196
1
So, yes, BlueDragon is sometimes inconsistent, but so is CFMX (at least the
documentation), since they first tell you that you "must not" use reserved
keywords for variables names, et
d me doing more testing on BlueDragon for months now.
Bug #867 and 868 ... one is labelled a cfml engine bug, the other a
documentation bug...
Silly thing is the BD engine isn't even internally consistent on this
point -- or wasn't last time I tested it -- the same excplicitly
scoped variable
Hi Vince,
> I'd recommend posting this to the BlueDragon-Interest mailing list
Will do
> Also, if you're running BD 6.1, did you install the latest hotfix?
Some of the other things I'm doing don't work without the hotfixes so yes
I'm fully patched..
> Bet
Hi Paul,
To whom did you send the emails at New Atlanta?
I'd recommend posting this to the BlueDragon-Interest mailing list, which
has a much higher concentration of BlueDragon users than CF-Talk:
http://www.newatlanta.com/products/bluedragon/self_help/archive_search/index
..cfm
Als
Incidentally, CFMX 6.1 and 7 both handle the example I posted fine :)
Paul
~|
Logware (www.logware.us): a new and convenient web-based time tracking
application. Start tracking and documenting hours spent on a project or with a
Hi All,
I'm currently playing around with BD and looking at aggressively developing
an application in it at the moment and I seem to have hit an issue and would
like some verification. I've already sent mails to newatlanta but I'm
impatient :)
Basically I have a straight HTML form with a file
OK, now that I understand your process better I can see why you are
wondering about these issues! In your case you would want the entire
CF system exposed because you're not deploying an application to
production, you're delivering an entire system to a customer.
The J2EE packaging might make the
> I'm at a loss as why you wouldn't want to disable the CFAdmin. You
> really shouldn't need it in production at all, if all you want it for
> is a log viewer, I suggest notepad. Having a slow running log viewer
> doesnt justify the security issues it presents.
When you're sending a team of consul
> > > Because they want a J2EE app not a ColdFusion app.
> > Which is just a matter of semantics, correct?
>
> Perhaps, but it's important to some people.
I wholeheartedly agree and understand. I'm just trying to make sure I'm not
missing something. :)
> You're missing the point. The scenario is
> So as not to inundate the user with the multitude of options provided
> in the Administrator, for one, and to make sure that a user doesn't
> change a particular setting or settings that your application relies
> on, for another. Further, I wouldn't want to dump settings and stuff
> in a producti
All the Woulda-Coulda-Shouldas
Layin' in the sun,
Talkin' 'bout the things
They woulda coulda shoulda done...
But those Woulda-Coulda-Shouldas
All ran away and hid
From one little Did.
-Shel Silverstein-
On Feb 8, 2005, at 3:19 PM, Adrocknaphobia wrote:
>
> It's important to remember that CF i
On Feb 8, 2005, at 3:10 PM, Mike Kear wrote:
> As the person who kicked this thread off in the first place, I have to
> say I'm still confused.
>
> My original question was about whether we'd be able to produce
> standalone working apps, and I think several answers attempted to
> answer it, but I
On Wed, 9 Feb 2005 10:10:59 +1100, Mike Kear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [Scenario A] A trade show. We want to hand out samples of our work to
> visitors to the booth.Just give them CDs of some sample sites,
> sample sites work. I kind of get the idea that wont work unless they
> alread
Scenario A) Yes, they would need a J2EE Server.
Scenario B) No, that would still need a J2EE Server.
It's important to remember that CF isn't the best platform to develop
PC based applications. It's meant for server-based applications.
-Adam
On Wed, 9 Feb 2005 10:10:59 +1100, Mike Kear <[EMAIL
As the person who kicked this thread off in the first place, I have to
say I'm still confused.
My original question was about whether we'd be able to produce
standalone working apps, and I think several answers attempted to
answer it, but I dont think I fully grasped the implications.
Here's two
I'm at a loss as why you wouldn't want to disable the CFAdmin. You
really shouldn't need it in production at all, if all you want it for
is a log viewer, I suggest notepad. Having a slow running log viewer
doesnt justify the security issues it presents.
-Adam
On Tue, 8 Feb 2005 16:43:13 -0500, B
On Tue, 8 Feb 2005 16:43:13 -0500, Ben Rogers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Because they want a J2EE app not a ColdFusion app.
> Which is just a matter of semantics, correct?
Perhaps, but it's important to some people.
> I'm at a loss for why I'd want to duplicate the functionality of the
> Cold
On Tue, 8 Feb 2005 16:43:13 -0500, Ben Rogers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Because they want a J2EE app not a ColdFusion app.
>
> Which is just a matter of semantics, correct?
I see what you're saying, but not really. A ColdFusion app
traditionally is nothing more than a mix of HTML, CFM, CFC,
> Because they want a J2EE app not a ColdFusion app.
Which is just a matter of semantics, correct?
> With the new Admin
> API you can build a custom console into your app for deployment
> instead of the full CF Admin - because you will only need the subset
> of admin features necessary for your a
On Tue, 8 Feb 2005 10:54:25 -0500, Ben Rogers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This all makes sense, except, why would the customer, having purchased a
> full copy of ColdFusion Enterpirse, want a crippled installation of
> ColdFusion Enterprise (i.e. sans the ColdFusion Administrator)?
Because they w
> I see your situation. This isn't really a "feature for the masses"
> like Flash Forms so much as it's a huge convenience (and potentially
> big source of new revenue for Macromedia) for pure J2EE shops who have
> been hesitant in the past. At the very least, hopefully you have a
> better understa
On Tue, 8 Feb 2005 11:40:10 -0500, Ben Rogers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yes, this helps a lot. Thanks for the detailed response. Unfortunately, it
> doesn't appear that this feature will be of much use to us. When we install
> apps in corporate environments, we're usually provided with servers a
abetta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 08, 2005 11:23 AM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: Re: Sourceless deployment in BlueDragon (was: CFMX 7 is released)
>
> On Tue, 8 Feb 2005 10:54:25 -0500, Ben Rogers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Regarding serial
On Tue, 8 Feb 2005 10:54:25 -0500, Ben Rogers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Regarding serial numbers, it's your choice as to whether or not you
> > include it when you compile the application. If you're selling a
> > product to another company/customer, you would not include the serial
> > number,
> Regarding serial numbers, it's your choice as to whether or not you
> include it when you compile the application. If you're selling a
> product to another company/customer, you would not include the serial
> number, as they would need their own serial number for their own
> servers. However, if
On Tue, 8 Feb 2005 02:00:59 -0800, Dick Applebaum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have been told, maybe lead to believe is more like it, that you can't
> redistro CFMX without a license agreement (fee implied).
See comments from Ben and Dave in this thread for more on licensing.
> Also, your earli
> It's a separate license that you'll want to purchase, your license is
> limited to 1 machine 2 CPUs (which in the example below is the machine you
> packaged it from).
Then I guess I don't understand what the purpose of the EAR/WAR file is? I'm
sure I'm missing something, but why would I deploy
On Tue, 8 Feb 2005 10:55:27 +0100, Micha Schopman
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Where should we apply ;), ... I'd personally have some ideas about
> articles. It used to be Amy Wong.
I believe that you can still send articles directly to Amy.
--
Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/
Team Fus
On Tue, 8 Feb 2005 10:18:38 -0500, Ben Rogers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm still a little fuzzy on this. If we develop an application on ColdFusion
> Enterprise and package it, do we include the license from the server we
> developed the application on, or must we purchase a new, separate licen
AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Sourceless deployment in BlueDragon (was: CFMX 7 is released)
I'm still a little fuzzy on this. If we develop an application on ColdFusion
Enterprise and package it, do we include the license from the server we
developed the application on, or must we purchase a new, s
CF-Talk
> Subject: RE: Sourceless deployment in BlueDragon (was: CFMX 7 is released)
>
> Not exactly, you can indeed develop on the no-cost developer edition and
> build a deployment package. But you'll need a serial number on that
> deployed
> version (or it'll time out
On Tue, 8 Feb 2005 08:28:13 -0500, Ben Forta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Not exactly, you can indeed develop on the no-cost developer edition and
> build a deployment package. But you'll need a serial number on that deployed
> version (or it'll time out after 30 days). Packaging changed, licensing
es [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, February 08, 2005 12:47 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: Sourceless deployment in BlueDragon (was: CFMX 7 is released)
>You can create a WAR or EAR file that contains your CF application and
>everything necessary to run it and then just deploy the WAR/
-Talk
Subject: Re: Sourceless deployment in BlueDragon (was: CFMX 7 is released)
On Feb 7, 2005, at 11:02 PM, Sean Corfield wrote:
> On Tue, 08 Feb 2005 01:46:33 -0400, Ryan Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>> Do I understand correctly that one can use the free developer ver
On Feb 7, 2005, at 11:02 PM, Sean Corfield wrote:
> On Tue, 08 Feb 2005 01:46:33 -0400, Ryan Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>> Do I understand correctly that one can use the free developer version
>> of CFMX 7, build Coldfusion apps, and then deploy them to a server
>> which has Tomcat runn
9:09
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: Sourceless deployment in BlueDragon (was: CFMX 7 is
released)
On Tue, 8 Feb 2005 09:01:48 +0100, Micha Schopman
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Do you happen to know if there are any articles planned about this
> subject on the developers part of the Macromed
On Tue, 8 Feb 2005 09:01:48 +0100, Micha Schopman
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Do you happen to know if there are any articles planned about this
> subject on the developers part of the Macromedia website :)
No idea - but anyone is welcome to submit articles for the Developer Center!
--
Sean A Co
of een beter service niveau? Voor meer
>informatie zie www.modernmedia.nl
>
>
>-
>
>-Original Message-
>From: Sean Corfield [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: dinsdag 8 februari
: dinsdag 8 februari 2005 8:02
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: Sourceless deployment in BlueDragon (was: CFMX 7 is
released)
On Tue, 08 Feb 2005 01:46:33 -0400, Ryan Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Do I understand correctly that one can use the free developer version
of CFMX 7, build Coldfusion
On Tue, 08 Feb 2005 01:46:33 -0400, Ryan Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Do I understand correctly that one can use the free developer version of CFMX
> 7, build Coldfusion apps, and then deploy them to a server which has Tomcat
> running and they will work? All without shelling out for CFMX
>You can create a WAR or EAR file that contains your CF application and
>everything necessary to run it and then just deploy the WAR/EAR to a
>clean install of JRun, WebLogic, WebSphere, Tomcat etc that has never
>seen ColdFusion.
Do I understand correctly that one can use the free developer versi
On Mon, 7 Feb 2005 22:18:08 -0500, Vince Bonfanti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Wow. Just like BlueDragon. (Sorry, couldn't resist).
Except that BlueDragon doesn't compile to Java bytecode. (Sorry,
couldn't resist :)
--
Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.o
Wow. Just like BlueDragon. (Sorry, couldn't resist).
Vince Bonfanti
New Atlanta Communications, LLC
http://www.newatlanta.com
> -Original Message-
> From: Sean Corfield [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, February 07, 2005 4:39 PM
> To: CF-Talk
> Sub
On Mon, 7 Feb 2005 14:12:44 -0800, Matt Robertson
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sean,
>
> As you said in another thread, this is gonna need a lot of howto's as
> we wind on down the road.
>
> Diggin' it all...
>
I wrote an article for CFDJ about MX 7's new deployment options
(pre-compiled, sourc
Sean,
As you said in another thread, this is gonna need a lot of howto's as
we wind on down the road.
Diggin' it all...
:-)
--
--mattRobertson--
Janitor, MSB Web Systems
mysecretbase.com
~|
Find out how CFTicket can increase
Just to further clarify:
Sourceless deployment is different from J2EE packaged deployment.
Sourceless deployment means: compile source to bytecode and deploy the
bytecode (to a CFMX 7 server).
J2EE packaged deployment means: create a WAR/EAR that includes the CF
runtime etc and deploy to a J2EE
On Mon, 7 Feb 2005 15:26:07 -0500, Greg Luce <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So if the java byte code isn't interpreted by th CF runtime, can it be
> deployed on a run server without CF installed?
You can create a WAR or EAR file that contains your CF application and
everything necessary to run it an
So if the java byte code isn't interpreted by th CF runtime, can it be
deployed on a run server without CF installed?
On Mon, 7 Feb 2005 11:36:55 -0800, Sean Corfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 7 Feb 2005 11:44:14 -0500, Dave Carabetta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Well, it's not so mu
On Mon, 7 Feb 2005 11:44:14 -0500, Dave Carabetta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Well, it's not so much what it's compiled down to so much as the
> version of the CF runtime that needs to interpret the byte code I
> think.
The byte code is processed by the JVM - it is not interpreted by the CF runti
I don't think it's atypical for a newer version to not work with an older
version.
- Calvin
-Original Message-
From: Dave Carabetta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, February 07, 2005 11:44 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: Sourceless deployment in BlueDragon (was: CFMX 7 i
On Mon, 7 Feb 2005 17:05:28 +0100, Micha Schopman
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Why would it break on CFMX6.1 ? .. that is odd, since it is compiled to
> java bytecode.
>
Well, it's not so much what it's compiled down to so much as the
version of the CF runtime that needs to interpret the byte cod
On Feb 7, 2005, at 8:05 AM, Micha Schopman wrote:
> Why would it break on CFMX6.1 ? .. that is odd, since it is compiled to
> java bytecode.
>
>
My guess would be different runtimes w/different interfaces with the
generated bytecode.
HTH
Dick
Apple's market share does provide us with an accur
: Re: Sourceless deployment in BlueDragon (was: CFMX 7 is
released)
On Mon, 7 Feb 2005 10:00:32 -0500, Calvin Ward <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It appears Sourceless deployment is supported in CFMX 7 Developer
Edition as
> well (free).
>
Here's the breakdown:
Pre-com
On Mon, 7 Feb 2005 10:00:32 -0500, Calvin Ward <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It appears Sourceless deployment is supported in CFMX 7 Developer Edition as
> well (free).
>
Here's the breakdown:
Pre-compiled and Sourceless Deployment:
Free across all versions of ColdFusion MX 7. However, this featu
It appears Sourceless deployment is supported in CFMX 7 Developer Edition as
well (free).
- Calvin
-Original Message-
From: Vince Bonfanti [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, February 07, 2005 9:37 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Sourceless deployment in BlueDragon (was: CFMX 7 is
Yes, sourceless deployment is supported in the BlueDragon standard edition
(BlueDragon Server JX). It's not supported in the BlueDragon free edition.
Vince Bonfanti
New Atlanta Communications, LLC
http://www.newatlanta.com
> -Original Message-
> From: Martin Parry [ma
The error page gets written to an HTML file within the
"WEB-INF/bluedragon/work/temp/rtelogs" directory. The file name will be
something like "bderror1234.html". Can you email the error file directly to
me ([EMAIL PROTECTED])? I'll have someone take a look at it an
Steve,
The error page didn't come through...
For this sort of detailed help with BlueDragon, I'd recommend subscribing to
the BlueDragon-Interest mailing list and posting your message there:
http://www.newatlanta.com/products/bluedragon/self_help/archive_search/index
.cfm
Vince Bo
Hmm, they didn't get pasted in... Here they are
***
Type Application
Tag Context CFTRY: Line=4; Column=1
|
+-- CFTRY: Line=48; Column=2
|
+-- CFLOCK: Line=49; Column=3
|
+-- CFIF: Line=50; Column=4
|
+-
The samples didn't show up for me. You also might want to try giving the
Blue Dragon Mailing List a shot. They're pretty helpful there. ;)
Warm regards,
Jordan Michaels
Vivio Technologies
Steve Brownlee wrote:
>I've installed BlueDragon on my JBoss server and f
I've installed BlueDragon on my JBoss server and finally got all the
configurations right. I migrated my ColdFusion code over, so now I'm testing
my application and getting CFML RunTime Errors in the most unlikely places.
Here'
in the classpath... along with
"...Server.jar"
also.. my version number shows correct... but I am still experiencing
the same problem.
On Fri, 5 Nov 2004 09:04:05 -0500, Vince Bonfanti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I assume you're running BD 6.1? If so, apply the latest hotfix:
--- Gert Franz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Well generally you are right, but who allways writes variables.name or
> something like that.
I do. No unscoped variables in my code.
__
Do you Yahoo!?
Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page.
www.yahoo.
yes sir. I am. Thanks I'll update it.
On Fri, 5 Nov 2004 09:04:05 -0500, Vince Bonfanti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I assume you're running BD 6.1? If so, apply the latest hotfix:
>
>ftp://ftp.newatlanta.com/public/bluedragon/6_1/hotfix/Sept_2004
>
> This i
If so, apply the latest hotfix:
>
> ftp://ftp.newatlanta.com/public/bluedragon/6_1/hotfix/Sept_2004
>
>This is fixed in the BD 6.2 beta, and we're also planning an update to the
>web site soon to put hotfixes on the downloads page.
>
>Vince Bonfanti
>New A
I assume you're running BD 6.1? If so, apply the latest hotfix:
ftp://ftp.newatlanta.com/public/bluedragon/6_1/hotfix/Sept_2004
This is fixed in the BD 6.2 beta, and we're also planning an update to the
web site soon to put hotfixes on the downloads page.
Vince Bonfanti
N
I have a site that runs fine on cfmx, I attempted to move it over to BD.
One of my includes "includes/common/_header.cfm"
has this line:
if i comment that line out... the site comes up fine in BD... with
that line uncommented it just sits there... loading loading.
loading...
any ideas, s
At 04:01 AM 11/5/2004, you wrote:
>Subject: Bluedragon Server
>From: Calvin Ward <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 02:46:38 -0600
>Thread:
>http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm/method=messages&threadid=36359&forumid=4#183454
>
>I'm no
ou want to consider
Railo and the other one-offs).
- Calvin
Jeffry Houser wrote:
> BlueDragon has implemented cfcollection / cfsearch for a while (In their
>initial 6.1 release?). The underlying engine is not Verity, though. It
>uses one from the Apache project (I believe Lucene).
BlueDragon has implemented cfcollection / cfsearch for a while (In their
initial 6.1 release?). The underlying engine is not Verity, though. It
uses one from the Apache project (I believe Lucene). It is not identical
to Verity, although from the point of CF code, it doesn't make
cascading="standart"
> cascade-to-resultset="yes"
> merge-url-form="no">
>
>- Gert -
>
>-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
>Von: Jordan Michaels [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Gesendet: Freitag,
Jordan Michaels [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gesendet: Freitag, 5. November 2004 01:20
An: CF-Talk
Betreff: Re: Bluedragon Server
Intriguing. I was always under the impression that if you defined the
scope in the first place, the same kind of performance increase would
occur? Is that not what happens?
Intriguing. I was always under the impression that if you defined the
scope in the first place, the same kind of performance increase would
occur? Is that not what happens?
Thanks! Keep up the good work!
-Jordan
Gert Franz wrote:
>hi there,
>
>just take a look at the performance tests we di
-Talk
Betreff: Re: Bluedragon Server
Well, my speculation is based on what has been made public on MM's site
and at MAX, the the stated focus of Blackstone appears to be feature
set, I'd say that BD will be chasing CF7 much like they are over a year
behind CF6.1.
My commentary on the di
I didn't know cfimage was in Blackstone, I don't any specific feature that I'm
refering to, however how about the flash related stuff?
-Calvin
-Original Message-
From: Vince Bonfanti
Date: 11/4/04 1:30 pm
To: CF-Talk
Subj: RE: Bluedragon Server
Perhaps. As I'
I don't think that's entirely accurate. For example, isn't one of those differences is
lack of support for some features in cfcollection/cfsearch?
-Calvin
-Original Message-
From: Vince Bonfanti
Date: 11/4/04 1:29 pm
To: CF-Talk
Subj: RE: Bluedragon Server
Yes,
anguages continue to grow apart, they will become more distinct.
For better or worse, BD is not exactly CF.
-Calvin
-Original Message-
From: Stephen Moretti (cfmaster)
Date: 11/4/04 12:36 pm
To: CF-Talk
Subj: Re: Bluedragon Server
Calvin Ward wrote:
>While that may be true, it
Perhaps. As I've stated before (in this forum, I think), there's really
nothing special or tricky in Blackstone that we shouldn't be able to
implement fairly quickly in BlueDragon. Blackstone is an incremental feature
release without fundamental architectural changes, such
Yes, of course. But you should note that it's *because* of those variances
(the enhancements, not the limitations) that people are choosing BlueDragon.
Which only makes sense: if BlueDragon didn't do some things better than
CFMX, there wouldn't be any reason to use it.
Vince
Calvin Ward wrote:
>While that may be true, it seems probable the the release of Blackstone will further
>create a gap between actual CFMX and BD
>
>
Of course, this is pure speculation. Speculating here myself, because
I'm not on the beta test, but I would not be surprised if MM shortened
B
While that may be true, it seems probable the the release of Blackstone will further
create a gap between actual CFMX and BD
- Calvin
-Original Message-
From: Vince Bonfanti
Date: 11/4/04 6:49 am
To: CF-Talk
Subj: RE: Bluedragon Server
I should have said: in BlueDragon 6.2, the
I actually said variances not limitations.
If you are developing products that are intended to be deployed cross platform, then
you have consider all variances.
- Calvin
-Original Message-
From: Vince Bonfanti
Date: 11/4/04 6:46 am
To: CF-Talk
Subj: RE: Bluedragon Server
So has anyone here actually used IgniteFusion on a site in production?
I realize it is a bit behind CFMX and Bluedragon, but perhaps it has enough to justify
using it, considering its no-strings-attached free license.
I mean, for common database interaction, email transaction, etc, certainly
Yes, according to their website, Railo is in Alpha 4, with an expected release of
version 1.0 during the first part of 2005.
>Yes on enhancement DB has that Macromedia STILL does not support is
>better implementation of xpaths and I applaud BD for this...i can't
>beleive you can't do xmlsearch(m
early beta?
Adam H
On Thu, 4 Nov 2004 07:48:33 -0500, Vince Bonfanti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I should have said: in BlueDragon 6.2, the list of incompatibilities is even
> shorter, but the list of enhancements is longer.
>
> Vince
>
>
>
> > -Original
Sorry, I should get my thoughts together completely before writing these...
Of the 7 pages of BlueDragon 6.1 incompatibilities, many of these are same
incompatibilities you'll find when upgrading from CF5 to CFMX, such as lack
of support for DSN-less connections and differences between th
I should have said: in BlueDragon 6.2, the list of incompatibilities is even
shorter, but the list of enhancements is longer.
Vince
> -Original Message-
> From: Vince Bonfanti [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2004 7:46 AM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject:
Actually, that's not quite true. The BlueDragon 6.1 CFML Compatibility Guide
is indeed 44 pages (PDF). However, the first 7 pages are title page, table
of contents, intro, etc. Then everything from page 15 to 44 describes
enhancements that BD 6.1 provides that aren't supported by ColdFu
Keep in mind. There is 44 pages of variance where BD does not work in the same fashion
as the actual CFMX product that you will want to factor into your decision making.
- Calvin
-Original Message-
From: Ryan Jones
Date: 11/4/04 2:17 am
To: CF-Talk
Subj: Re: Bluedragon Server
401 - 500 of 914 matches
Mail list logo
