RE: ASP dot Net CMS

If anyone is interested there is now a FREE solution offering based on
Microsoft CMS (you will of course need MCMS in the first instance). This
is a fully cohesive accelerator solution as opposed to being simply a
'bag of bolts'. It provides additional functionality and provides a
rapid 'non-development' environment to further enhance the solution -
MCMS.RAPID is entirely extensible. Furthermore MCMS.RAPID provides out
of the box compliance with AA accessibility standards (it would be AAA,
but of course that would also depend on your content)
 
MCMS.RAPID is a global initiative and is promoted at
www.microsoft.com/cmserver or you can visit www.mcmsrapid.com and
download the solution for FREE (again, you will need MCMS or an
evaluation version). 
 
I hope I don't get accused of trying to sell anything here. I'll say it
again MCMS.RAPID is FREE.

________________________________

From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of John
Sent: 22 February 2005 16:18
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [CMS] ASP dot Net CMS


This is a valid concern, but I don't see how we get through the real
issues without just starting another religious war.  I have always been
skeptical of Microsoft, inventing the phrase "if you're not actively
against them, you're implicitly with them".  Before picking the CMS with
which I now work I evaluated platforms, primarily J2EE vs. .NET.  One
interesting point was how frank, accurate and open the .NET resources
were about strengths and limitations.  Many of the Java resources were
bitter, inaccurate and biased.  To a large extent perspective on this
issue depends on who one listens to.  The rumblings I hear indicate that
Microsoft sold more server licenses last year than all Unix vendors
combined, that a default Windows Server 2003 installation is more secure
than a typical Linux installation, and that .NET is a very viable,
flexible and high-performance enterprise development platform.  One
problem seems to be the lack of success stories in the market compared
to more established platforms.  I also prefer .NET's documentation and
XML "auto"-documentation features.  If you've ever had to call Microsoft
for support (not from a home user perspective, but from an enterprise),
it's a totally different and positive experience.  I remember one CMS
vendor telling me the machine was bluescreening because of OS and
hardware issue, and Microsoft telling me "if you uninstall [that CMS]
from that server it will stop bluescreening".  Sure enough, the bug was
with the CMS, but it took months for that vendor to deal with it.

I think with .NET Microsoft really got something right and it makes
sense to capitalize on their huge research and development budget,
especially in the hopes that Mono on Linux really takes off (this should
probably be a backdoor strategy for all .NET CMS vendors).  Like it or
not, Microsoft and .NET are here to stay and apparently picking up CMS
market share as next generation CMS technology goes mainstream.  I've
done large CMS projects with .NET, Perl and Java and I can say without a
doubt that for me, .NET with Visual Studio allows almost an order of
magnitude greater productivity than the other platforms, and more
reliable systems.  For me it is easier to write new code in C# than port
existing C# code to Java because of simple missing constructs like
foreach.  I think J2EE containers tend to lead to vendor lock-in much
like .NET, and I have done enough Perl to know it's not a good candidate
for highly-integrated enterprise solutions.  PHP and Python may be
better candidates, but my experience leads me to believe the open source
CMS products take a lot more heavy lifting and specialized skills.  Not
all of us are building systems managed by teams of developers - many
projects are actually delivering on the promise of CMS by putting
control in the hands of the business users.  I think the other tools are
less suited for achieving these goals.  Like most new CMS products, .NET
was built from the ground up around XML - I don't know about Python, but
in Java and Perl XML is not nearly as easy.

Mat Griffin wrote: 

	
	
	Why are there so many blinkered people relying upon Microsoft
products? Trying looking a bit further than just MS.
	
	
	

		I think there is a problem with the term CMS - many
people developing sites today with .NET are looking for integrated,
extensible, content-centric or content-enabled web application
infrastructure, not typical templating systems that simply generate
static files which may end with aspx.
		
		
		
		_______________________________________________
		cms mailing list
		[email protected]
		Subscription controls:
		http://lists.cms-forum.org/mailman/listinfo/cms
		Netiquette FAQ and related CMS lists - [cms-forum],
[cms-pr], [contentmanagers], [cmpros]
		http://www.cmsreview.com/NetiquetteFAQ.html
		

	
	
	



**********************************************************************
This e-mail message (including any attachments) is intended for the addressee(s) only, and may contain confidential information. The unauthorised use, disclosure or copying of this e-mail or any information contained within it is strictly prohibited and may be illegal. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the author and delete this e-mail immediately in its entirety. This footnote also confirms that this e-mail message has been swept by a virus checker for the presence of known computer viruses. This statement does not constitute an acceptance of liability on the part of Artemis Corporation or its employees in the event of technical or virus issues generated by this e-mail. It is the responsibility of the recipient to take adequate security measures. 
**********************************************************************