[thelist] stuck using cf4.5? upgrade to cfmx - no to PHP

[Jeff Howden]

andrew,

><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><
> From: Andrew
>
> you took a lot of trouble to point out something that
> is personal and subjective.
><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><

and you haven't been doing that too?

anytime you get into a conversation about politics, religion, platform,
tables vs divs, cats & dogs, pale ale vs stout, the color of healthy poo,
it's going to be an exchange of subjective opinions.  i hope the fact that
i'm very passionate about it is an indication of the positive impact it's
had on me as a developer and not a measure of how much of an ass i can be.
;p

><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><
> I particularly like the way you took selective 'choice'
> text from the linked articles.
><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><

first of all, benchmarks that are 2 years old or older are hardly even worth
looking at.  i read the one for win2k3 vs. red hat advanced server 2.1.
based solely on the numbers it's obvious to see that win2k3 outperformed
linux in excess of 1.5 times.

the site is obviously pro-linux/anti-microsoft so it's no surprise there's
the usual cry-baby antics so common from the open source zealots.  i choose
not to get pulled into that rhetoric and allow it to skew the results i see
in front of me.  if that's what you're referring to when you say "took
selective 'choice' text", then yes, guilt as charged.  whoop-di-do-dah-day!

benchmarking servers is like the ultimate circle-jerk for the geekiest of
the server geeks.  these guys aren't average and neither are the configs of
the boxes being tested.  there's nothing "real-world" about any of it.  your
average sysadmin doesn't have the extensive knowledge of server tuning
usually possessed in the pinky of these benchmark geeks.  consequently, the
performance of a real-world server is directly proportional to the quality
and quantity of knowledge contained within the walnut of joe "average"
sysadmin and has little, if anything to do with the numbers you and i see in
these benchmarks.

for the record, i consider myself one of those average joes.  i know enough
to manage my own box and get the kind of performance i want (for the most
part) out of it (yes, i host evolt.org).  my knowledge is
win2k/iis5/cfmx/mssql2k specific.  i wouldn't have a clue about how to even
get started with a linux box, nor do i have any desire.  i stick with what i
know because it does the job i need it to do with the knowledge i already
possess (or am able to find easily).

><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><
> except that the foolish part of not realising you have
> gone done a path to then provide a solution to something
> that only 'you' know how to in 'your' way that is very
> foolish indeed!
><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><

huh?  spit out the gum and try that one again.

the original question was about cf4.5.  i commented that an upgrade to cf5
or cfmx was in order because of some major performance improvements, new
features, etc.  what's so foolish about that?

if i recall, you're the one that suggested he make a jump from cf (something
he's deeply vested in) to php (something he's not).  who exactly is being
foolish here anyway?

.jeff

——————————————————————————————————————————————————————
Jeff Howden - Web Application Specialist
Résumé - http://jeffhowden.com/about/resume/
Code Library - http://evolt.jeffhowden.com/jeff/code/