September 30th, 2003, 09:48 PM
Fronpage vs. Cold Fusion
I used Frontpage and build a couple of pages. The fronpage code generates file that can be accessible by IE but when I tried to access the same page from Linux using Mozilla the pages looked ugly.
I looked on the frontpage code and the code was not clear html code and to do any kind of modification was difficult.
What kind of code Coldfusion creates compare to frontpage? Is it clear HTML code or Coldfusion version of HTML?
October 1st, 2003, 01:24 AM
Front page codes to MSIE browsers only. Coldfusion is a programming language that is embeded into an HTML document, not an editor like Frontpage or Dreamwaver. So in that respect Coldfusion is like PHP, PERL, C++, ASP and not frontpage.
If you looking for a good WYSIWYG program to create webpages I like Adobe GoLive. Dreamweaver has too many features, but is more advanced, plus I work a lot with "design" firms that create cool pages in photoshop, then I turn those cool pictures into website coding. Actully I just import the files into Adobe GoLive and it does 90% of the work for me.
October 1st, 2003, 10:55 AM
Frontpage is a WYSIWYG HTML code generator. ColdFusion is an application server. You are comparing apples to oranges.
So...you might compare FrontPage to Dreamweaver. You might compare ColdFusion to PHP or ASP.NET. But you would not compare FrontPage to ColdFusion.
October 1st, 2003, 11:34 AM
Re: Fronpage vs. Cold Fusion
The issue here is that Frontpage - a Microsoft product - was specifically designed to output HTML code that will not work in any other browser other than Internet Explorer (another Microsoft product). You should learn to create HTML by hand before using a commercial WYSINWYG editor, so you can discern the quality of the HTML the editor is producing on your own.
Abandon Frontpage. Delete it off of your PC, today. Buy a book on HTML, learn it yourself, and code by hand. Frontpage can only harm you in the long run.
I think this has already been answered.
I will add this, however - if you're coming from a non-programming background, and you're looking to add some dynamic features to your website - such as drawing content from a database, for instance - and the only "programming" you've done is HTML, then ColdFusion is the perfect language for you to learn.
It is tag-based, just like HTML, so the syntax should come quickly to you. It can be imbedded directly in an HTML document. It has fairly robust features, and can run on a wide variety of servers, as well as connect to a wide variety of databases.
October 1st, 2003, 02:55 PM
Re: Re: Fronpage vs. Cold Fusion
Edit: Wide varity of Windows Based servers.
No coldfusion app server for Linux/BSD/Solaris/HP UX/AIX or any other *iux based platform.
So if one decides to use CFML, your limited to windows-based servers only, which is why I gave up on CF for PHP about three years ago.
Its a shame though, if macromedia had ported the engine to *iux, chances are a majority of dymanic pages today would be in CFML, not PHP, because CFML is easier to learn and use from my expirance.
Why? Because Forms just look cooler in OS X...
Dutch, it's like German...but not!
October 1st, 2003, 03:27 PM
Re: Re: Re: Fronpage vs. Cold Fusion
We run ColdFusion MX on a Solaris server at my work as our intranet.
The ColdFusion MX engine is entirely Java based, and will basically run on any server you want to run it on. Cross-platform portability is actually one of CFML's core strengths, in addition to being easy-to-learn from HTML programming newbies.
October 1st, 2003, 03:28 PM
October 2nd, 2003, 12:51 AM
That's a new feature then. Previously with 4 & 5 it was for NT only...
October 2nd, 2003, 09:22 AM
Yeah, I figured as much... I know that the MX version is the first to run off of Java, which is likely one of the core reasons Macromedia moved to Java (portability).
October 2nd, 2003, 10:33 AM
Just for the record, this is not correct. CF 5 (and 4.5 too I believe) runs on Linux/Apache, Solaris, AIX, SuSe, and more.
October 2nd, 2003, 10:45 AM
Good to know. Thanks for the knowledge, kiteless. My first experience w/ CFML has been the MX version.
October 2nd, 2003, 01:54 PM
kiteless don't forget HP-UX !
BTW and FYI all together .. that list drgroove suplied it's only the officially supported os's list !
many users hv cfmx successfully instaled on os's that aren't listed in the MM website.
Brandon Harper for ex successfully instaled cfmx in freebsd 5.1, you can actually find an installation breef here
and shots here
And i also almost managed to put qnx + tomcat and cfmx to run, however always failed in the end .. never tried hard though .. i believe with a litle work, every OS that is able to run a jvm, cfmx will run on it.
even Mac OS support started out with a 'hack' like this ..
the same applies with database support, with the database has an odbc or jdbc driver, cfmx is able to connect to it.
Last edited by neus; October 2nd, 2003 at 02:02 PM.