Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/

[rthigpen <rthigpen AT nc.rr.com>]

Jeremy Portzer wrote:

the concensus take on CF is that (assuming similar skill levels, 
environments, etc) it can be quicker to develop in than ASP.  the 
abstraction level is a bit higher, and fewer lines of code will 
generally get the job done. this may result in lowered dev costs.

neither of these are based on free or open software.  both support open 
standard internet protocols to varying degrees.

ASP runs on a variety of platforms w/ chilisoft, but unless you're on 
windows you don't have access to COM components, which is where most of 
the power of ASP lies.  my advice would be to use windows if you go the 
ASP route.

CF runs on a variety of platforms also.  for the most part, it is 
equally functional on all of them.  (of course you only need one _good_ 
platform!)

hosting is widely available for both platforms, at similar prices. 
again, you only need one good host.

if the client will host internally, for CF they will need a CF server 
license, a host OS and webserver.  for ASP/win they will need a windows 
server OS license which includes the webserver and ASP engine.  also a 
databse.

for more on Flash/CF integration, this site hosts a popular mail list 
that is focused on this topic: <http://www.flashcfm.com/>.

--rt

> Marcia:  There's some nice integration with Flash Remoting and
> ColdFusion. I don't know the details, but there's been a lot of
> discussion of it on the Carolina ColdFuser Users Group mailing list (see
> http://www.ccfug.org/ ).  I would think this would be a big plus for
> choosing CF in your application.
>
> --Jeremy