[Zope] Zope vs. ColdFusion for e-commerce development
Thomas B. Passin
tpassin@mitretek.org
Tue, 9 Nov 1999 19:01:30 -0500
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_00A2_01BF2AE4.D51CAE80
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
I should say about my Cold Fusion experience that 1) I have three sites =
running, 2) they are all version 3.1, 3) they are all very low volume =
sites (not e-commerce), and 4) I don't use cookies or do much fancy =
stuff. On the other hand, I do pass in cgi variables and test for their =
existence and values, compute result strings, and turn triply-nested =
database queries into nicely formatted tables. I reuse frames and =
fragments of pages, as well as javascript blocks. I have never had any =
Cold Fusion failures on any of the sites in two years, running on Win 95 =
or NT.
Perhaps version 4 is something to be cautious of.
Tom Passin
-----Original Message-----
From: Thomas B. Passin <tpassin@mitretek.org>
To: zope@zope.org <zope@zope.org>
Date: Tuesday, November 09, 1999 6:00 PM
Subject: Re: [Zope] Zope vs. ColdFusion for e-commerce development
=20
=20
As a Cold Fusion user, I would say Cold Fusion is great, but it does =
depend on what you expect to be doing. If you were anticipating =
developing a lot of custom tags for Cold Fusion in C++, or a lot of Java =
applets, I'd say that Zope would be interesting since you can basically =
develop in Python, which is good, fast, and easier than C++.
=20
On the other hand, it you were going to do basically standard stuff =
like hit ODBC databases and create frames, forms, and pick lists, and =
manage session variables, I'd say Cold Fusion is for you. I don't think =
that the price should be much of a consideration (but don't forget $300 =
for Cold Fusion Studio, which I highly recommend), since the cost of =
your time in getting up the learning curve will be dominant in either =
case. Possibly you could make do with the $1000 version, especially at =
first, to lower the cost. Cold Fusion is much better documented than =
Zope, and I think simpler as well.
=20
As for the tagged language aspect, which both CF and Zope have, CF's =
tags are much simpler to understand and use.
=20
But if you think you are going to need a lot of custom programming, =
it could be a whole other ball game. Zope could be great.
=20
Tom Passin
From: Ben Galbraith <ben@galbraiths.org>
=20
=20
Zope Folks,
=20
I'm with a new e-commerce startup and we're currently evaluating =
the development tools we'll be using to create our website. The =
platform will either be Sun hardware running Solaris 7/Apache, or =
Intel/Linux boxes.
=20
We initially evaluated four solutions: mod_perl, PHP (using =
Apache module support), ColdFusion, and Zope. We've eliminated mod_perl =
because of maintenance nightmares, PHP because, well, we just did, and =
now we're down to ColdFusion and Zope. Initially I favored Zope, but =
there are a few concerns I have about it.
=20
First off, the size of the ColdFusion development pool and it's =
development history suggest greater stability and a more mature feature =
set. Second, it seems that ColdFusion offers all the functionality that =
Zope does and then some. Third, ColdFusion seems to offer similiar =
performance. Fourth, the database connectivity seems to be equal to =
Zope's. Fifth, their tag-based programming language seems to offer =
equivalent functionality to Zope's. Sixth, I can find more ColdFusion =
developers than I can shake a stick at, but I have to explain to =
everyone I meet what Zope is.
=20
So, as my lack of information leads me to believe, there are =
only two drawbacks to ColdFusion as compared to Zope: (1) I have to pay =
$3.5k for each license, and (2) Zope has a superior model for delegating =
ownership to different people for the website.
=20
Could you correct any misconceptions I have and explain to me =
why I should choose Zope over ColdFusion? I want to select the tool by =
Wed. or Thurs., so a quick reply would be appreciated.
=20
Thanks!
=20
Ben
------=_NextPart_000_00A2_01BF2AE4.D51CAE80
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META content=3Dtext/html;charset=3Diso-8859-1 =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type><!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD W3 =
HTML//EN"><!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<META content=3D'"MSHTML 4.72.3612.1706"' name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 size=3D2>I should say about my Cold Fusion =
experience=20
that 1) I have three sites running, 2) they are all version 3.1, 3) they =
are all=20
very low volume sites (not e-commerce), and 4) I don't use cookies or do =
much=20
fancy stuff. On the other hand, I do pass in cgi variables and =
test for=20
their existence and values, compute result strings, and turn =
triply-nested=20
database queries into nicely formatted tables. I reuse frames and=20
fragments of pages, as well as javascript blocks. I have never had =
any=20
Cold Fusion failures on any of the sites in two years, running on Win 95 =
or=20
NT.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>Perhaps version 4 is something to be cautious =
of.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>Tom Passin</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #000000 solid 2px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-LEFT: =
5px">
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><B>-----Original =
Message-----</B><BR><B>From:=20
</B>Thomas B. Passin <<A=20
=
href=3D"mailto:tpassin@mitretek.org">tpassin@mitretek.org</A>><BR><B>T=
o:=20
</B><A href=3D"mailto:zope@zope.org">zope@zope.org</A> <<A=20
href=3D"mailto:zope@zope.org">zope@zope.org</A>><BR><B>Date: =
</B>Tuesday,=20
November 09, 1999 6:00 PM<BR><B>Subject: </B>Re: [Zope] Zope vs. =
ColdFusion=20
for e-commerce development<BR><BR></DIV></FONT>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 size=3D2>As a Cold Fusion user, I would =
say Cold=20
Fusion is great, but it does depend on what you expect to be =
doing. If=20
you were anticipating developing a lot of custom tags for Cold =
Fusion in=20
C++, or a lot of Java applets, I'd say that Zope would be =
interesting since=20
you can basically develop in Python, which is good, fast, and easier =
than=20
C++.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>On the other hand, it you were going to do =
basically=20
standard stuff like hit ODBC databases and create frames, forms, and =
pick=20
lists, and manage session variables, I'd say Cold Fusion is for =
you. I=20
don't think that the price should be much of a consideration (but =
don't=20
forget $300 for Cold Fusion Studio, which I highly recommend), since =
the=20
cost of your time in getting up the learning curve will be dominant =
in=20
either case. Possibly you could make do with the $1000 version, =
especially=20
at first, to lower the cost. Cold Fusion is much better =
documented=20
than Zope, and I think simpler as well.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>As for the tagged language aspect, which both CF =
and Zope=20
have, CF's tags are much simpler to understand and use.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>But if you think you are going to need a lot of =
custom=20
programming, it could be a whole other ball game. Zope could =
be=20
great.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>Tom Passin</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #000000 solid 2px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
PADDING-LEFT: 5px">
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><B>From: </B>Ben Galbraith =
<<A=20
=
href=3D"mailto:ben@galbraiths.org">ben@galbraiths.org</A>><BR><BR></DI=
V></FONT>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Zope Folks,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I'm with a new e-commerce =
startup and we're=20
currently evaluating the development tools we'll be using to =
create our=20
website. The platform will either be Sun hardware running =
Solaris=20
7/Apache, or Intel/Linux boxes.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>We initially evaluated four =
solutions:=20
mod_perl, PHP (using Apache module support), ColdFusion, and =
Zope. =20
We've eliminated mod_perl because of maintenance nightmares, PHP =
because, well, we just did, and now we're down to ColdFusion and =
Zope. Initially I favored Zope, but there are a few =
concerns I=20
have about it.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>First off, the size of the =
ColdFusion=20
development pool and it's development history suggest greater =
stability=20
and a more mature feature set. Second, it seems that =
ColdFusion=20
offers all the functionality that Zope does and then some. =
Third,=20
ColdFusion seems to offer similiar performance. Fourth, =
the=20
database connectivity seems to be equal to Zope's. Fifth, =
their=20
tag-based programming language seems to offer equivalent =
functionality=20
to Zope's. Sixth, I can find more ColdFusion developers =
than I can=20
shake a stick at, but I have to explain to everyone I meet what =
Zope=20
is.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>So, as my lack of information =
leads me to=20
believe, there are only two drawbacks to ColdFusion as compared =
to Zope:=20
(1) I have to pay $3.5k for each license, and (2) Zope has a =
superior=20
model for delegating ownership to different people for the=20
website.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Could you correct any =
misconceptions I have=20
and explain to me why I should choose Zope over =
ColdFusion? I want=20
to select the tool by Wed. or Thurs., so a quick reply would be=20
appreciated.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Thanks!</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial=20
size=3D2>Ben</FONT></DIV></FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></=
HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_00A2_01BF2AE4.D51CAE80--