« ESPN Gamecast | Main | A Watershed »
April 05, 2006
Continuing MySpace saga
Continuing MySpace saga: I'm linking this here because I don't see it on the ColdFusion-oriented weblogs yet... Tim Anderson points to Scott Guthrie talking about MySpace actually using ASP.NET and that .cfm URLs are mapped into .NET processing. I see that Adam Howitt has already commented in Scott's blog there, and John Beynon had an independent post last week. I've never gotten the fascination over MySpace, but other people have thought it important, so I'm highlighting that conversation here.
Posted by John Dowdell at April 5, 2006 04:53 PM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://weblogs.macromedia.com/mtadmin/mt-tb.cgi/7286
Comments
I must say that this is not the first time we see this happening. ColdFusion MX is on the arena for 4 years (6.0 was launched in 2002) and we still have great players moving away from CF because of performance issues. It's aways the same thing: "CF it's great and cute, but can't scale". For 4 years I've watched big sites moving away from it (or planning to do so), despite of all the things we know and say. I can talk from a limited (brazilian market) perspective (we do have some heavy-traffic - 6 digits pageviews per day - sites powered by CF), but I believe this is not a localized thing (take MySpace as an example). What's really wrong with CF and heavy traffic? CF sales growed up. Nice, but where these licences are used? For large-traffic websites or for intranets?
Does anybody knows if there are new expressive (in terms of traffic) adoption of ColdFusion in the last few years (post MX) on public websites? I really don't see people adopting CF for a heavy traffic environment. Instead, they move away from it. Old examples (APC, Symantec, etc) are not valid, I need new adoptions to feel better.
MySpace is running BlueDragon (a CFML server) not as a final choice, but clearly as a midle-term until they can migrate entirely to pure .NET.
Did I miss the point (hope so)? What do you guys think about it?
[jd sez: Most of the "can't scale" stuff I hear come as excuses from people wanting to change very old architecture. I haven't heard these arguments stand against the recent post-J2EE versions of ColdFusion. Doesn't mean people won't still try those arguments; just means that such challenges rarely stand outside the online debating field.]
Posted by: Alex Hubner at April 5, 2006 07:11 PM
Our company has been on CF for years and run 2 million plus uniques a month load balanced on web servers.
CF is a great, rapid development environment that will "scale" to no end. If it doesn't you have bad code, database or other technical problems.
One could argue that eBay, Yahoo, and MySpace need a "scalable" solution and have to go to .NET or such to handle the traffic.
By the way, how many people that dog on CF have 40 million uniques and over a billion page views a month?
Posted by: Jason McMinn at April 6, 2006 06:46 PM