Comments on: MS talking about myspace.com http://john.beynon.org.uk/2006/03/27/ms-talking-about-myspacecom/ Confessions of a code Junkie and anything else i fancy! Thu, 14 Jan 2010 03:02:54 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: Roger Lancefield http://john.beynon.org.uk/2006/03/27/ms-talking-about-myspacecom/#comment-564 Roger Lancefield Wed, 05 Apr 2006 08:41:13 +0000 http://john.beynon.org.uk/index.cfm/2006/3/27/MS-talking-about-myspace.com#comment-564 I'm really not sure that this is all that meaningful. MySpace was using BlueDragon rather than Macromedia ColdFusion and it was running, by all accounts, a "heavily modifed" version of Fusebox 3. Neither cutting edge nor standard. (See: http://www.fusebox.org/forums/messageview.cfm?catid=21&threadid=5179) It wouldn't surprise me if MS had managed to make significant performance gains on MySpace, but I'm willing to bet that this will have little or no impact on the vast majority of ColdFusion/Fusebox/framework users. A well-engineered and well-balanced car with a great engine, chassis, suspension and brakes that drives like a dream and tops out at say, 140mph doesn't suddenly become a dog because another car can pull 180mph. So what? Good is good enough for me. As Patrick said above, I'll worry about statistics like this when my sites are in danger of serving millions of users each week. I’m really not sure that this is all that meaningful. MySpace was using BlueDragon rather than Macromedia ColdFusion and it was running, by all accounts, a "heavily modifed" version of Fusebox 3. Neither cutting edge nor standard. (See:
http://www.fusebox.org/forums/messageview.cfm?catid=21&threadid=5179)

It wouldn’t surprise me if MS had managed to make significant performance gains on MySpace, but I’m willing to bet that this will have little or no impact on the vast majority of ColdFusion/Fusebox/framework users.

A well-engineered and well-balanced car with a great engine, chassis, suspension and brakes that drives like a dream and tops out at say, 140mph doesn’t suddenly become a dog because another car can pull 180mph. So what? Good is good enough for me. As Patrick said above, I’ll worry about statistics like this when my sites are in danger of serving millions of users each week.

]]> By: Mitch Rose http://john.beynon.org.uk/2006/03/27/ms-talking-about-myspacecom/#comment-562 Mitch Rose Mon, 03 Apr 2006 06:18:53 +0000 http://john.beynon.org.uk/index.cfm/2006/3/27/MS-talking-about-myspace.com#comment-562 Is lower CPU utilization always better? I don't think so. Perhaps we're not getting the whole story. Is lower CPU utilization always better? I don’t think so. Perhaps we’re not getting the whole story.

]]> By: Rick O http://john.beynon.org.uk/2006/03/27/ms-talking-about-myspacecom/#comment-563 Rick O Mon, 27 Mar 2006 12:19:44 +0000 http://john.beynon.org.uk/index.cfm/2006/3/27/MS-talking-about-myspace.com#comment-563 I see this as less of a loss for CF and more of a loss for Fusebox. Frameworks in general, and Fusebox in particular, are usually not built to be scalable in implementation, just scalable in development. I’m impressed that they got Fusebox up to 1.5bn as it is, as I have trouble getting FB into 7-digit traffic, much less 10-digit. Before anyone gets all offended, let me repeat that I’m not saying anything bad about FB, beyond that when it was just a glint in Hal’s eyes I don’t think he was think about traffic in the billions. I’d be curious to see if they’ve gone with any kind of framework on the ASP.NET side, or if they tuned each page individually. That is, is it really CF vs. ASP.NET (platform), or is it CF vs. C# (language), or is it FB vs. ASP.NET (methodology), or is it FB vs. C# (structure)? Not that I think we’ll ever get a true picture, as the spin machine is in full effect. I see this as less of a loss for CF and more of a loss for Fusebox. Frameworks in general, and Fusebox in particular, are usually not built to be scalable in implementation, just scalable in development. I’m impressed that they got Fusebox up to 1.5bn as it is, as I have trouble getting FB into 7-digit traffic, much less 10-digit.

Before anyone gets all offended, let me repeat that I’m not saying anything bad about FB, beyond that when it was just a glint in Hal’s eyes I don’t think he was think about traffic in the billions.

I’d be curious to see if they’ve gone with any kind of framework on the ASP.NET side, or if they tuned each page individually. That is, is it really CF vs. ASP.NET (platform), or is it CF vs. C# (language), or is it FB vs. ASP.NET (methodology), or is it FB vs. C# (structure)? Not that I think we’ll ever get a true picture, as the spin machine is in full effect.

]]> By: Patrick McElhaney http://john.beynon.org.uk/2006/03/27/ms-talking-about-myspacecom/#comment-565 Patrick McElhaney Mon, 27 Mar 2006 10:19:10 +0000 http://john.beynon.org.uk/index.cfm/2006/3/27/MS-talking-about-myspace.com#comment-565 That tells me two things: 1. When my web site gets as much traffic as MySpace, I might want to look into to .NET 2.0. 2. If my web site's going to scale as fast as MySpace, I might want to look into that other technology. That tells me two things:

1. When my web site gets as much traffic as MySpace, I might want to look into to .NET 2.0.

2. If my web site’s going to scale as fast as MySpace, I might want to look into that other technology.

]]>