RE: CFM vs ASP

Ahhh

In response to this (and not trying to show any siding or anything) I
have never had a problem with browser compatibility and anything I have
done with ASP. Everything is run on the server, or should be. It's up to
the developer to make the PAGE compatible. If you are talking about the
auto stuff that VS.Net does then well my suggestion is never trust
anything. I always check its output before continuing. 

Later,
Brett

"That's a pain that will shorely linger, and that's no lie" - Ed Grimley

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-hwg-techniques(at)hwg.org [mailto:owner-hwg-techniques(at)hwg.org]
On Behalf Of Geoff Mitchell
Sent: Tuesday, 14 May 2002 2:18 PM
To: Gibson, Timmi
Cc: hwg-techniques(at)hwg.org
Subject: RE: CFM vs ASP

Timmi,

OK, I don't contribute often, but this one is really bothering me with
the
misinformation that is being cast.  First of all, before one choses a
course
of action many things must be considered before launching including some
of
the issues that have been brought up in this thread that I won't repeat.
To
be clear when one talks about ASP or CF, you are comparing application
servers not simply a server-side language or script.  PHP, JSP, or Perl
are
all excellent for what they do. I am not here to preach CF, however, the
author of the PHP vs Cold Fusion article cited <. see Hank's snip> has
obviously never worked with CF and is seriously ill-informed.  CF most
definitely has user defineable functions and custom tags... probably one
of
the better characteristics of CF aside from the built session
management,
enterprise features, and ease of development.  I am not sure where the
other
author's in this thread are claiming "lack of extensibility", but it is
most
definitely more compatible cross-platform and cross-browser than .asp
will
ever hope to be. If you really want to get solid (yet biased) info on CF
go
to http://www.forta.com and for user built tags go to
http://www.cfextras.com or many other sites listed on Ben F.'s site.

My top four hang-ups with .asp based upon 6+ years of web development
for
Government and private industry are as follows:

1. Security - numerous problems running .asp and Active X components
across
SSL
2. Security - most of the problems with security in IIS stem from
extensions
that get loaded to support .asp, active x, and frontpage. Just check out
Microsoft's patches for IIS as well as developer net.
3. Security - numerous problems encountered with Government and
corporate
firewalls screening out .asp and active x.
4. Compatibilty - many MS extensions/functionality supported through
.asp
are not cross-browser supported aka Netscape. Image that!

A bit dated but a good comparison none-the-less of asp and cf
http://www.swynk.com/friends/murphy/ironic_isnt_it.asp
another article http://www.webtechniques.com/archives/2000/08/junk/

Now Macromedia is combining Allaire's JRUN (JSP product) with CF into a
new
product called CF MX (thought it was supposed to be called Neo) that
promises to combine the CF application server with the use of Java.  I
am
remaining cautiously optimistic about this approach. We haven't looked
at
the prerelease yet, so can't say much.

Geoff

<.snip from Hank>

I'm pretty sure you've used google before ... I'd do so now:)

If you really want a balanced view you'd probably need to include a few
more choices even if you don't have a developer pushing them at the
moment --

PHP
JSP
Perl
Python/Zope

I'm PHP biased myself -- here's a couple links (they're a little stale,
but worth reading):

http://php.weblogs.com/php_vs_asp
http://php.weblogs.com/php_vs_cold_fusion

HTH

HWG hwg-techniques mailing list archives, maintained by Webmasters @ IWA