The amazing adventures of Doug Hughes

Over the past year or two, I’ve used Mach-II quite a bit. In fact, this blog and Alagad.com are both Mach-II applications. However, I consulted Joe as he wrote Model-Glue and gave him feedback from my Mach-II perspective. Joe has done a great job and we’re beginning to see a lot of people praising Model-Glue. This has prompted the big question of the week: Is Mach-II dead?! The short answer is No !

Recently, several prominent people in the community have blogged on the apparent demise of Mach-II. The logic tends to be a comparison between the activity of the framework maintainers and the comparative quality of their respective documentation.

People seem to be making this comparison:

Comparison Mach-II Model-Glue
Has had frequent recent updates? No, but it did when it was first released. Yes, but it’s only recently been released.
Has good documentation? No, but Sean Corfield has published some good documentation and there are sites like MachII.info out there. Yes, but it’s not perfect.
The creators actively participate in the community? Not really, but they do sell training and Hal publishes his occasional newsletter. Yes, sometimes we wish he’d be quieter! 😉

Given that comparison, people seem to be drawing the conclusion that Mach-II must be dead and Model-Glue must be taking over.
I believe this argument is dramatically flawed. Consider the following questions:

Question:
Is Mach-II available for download?

Answer:
Yes.

Question:
Does Mach-II still work?

Answer:
Yes.

Question:
Is Mach-II still an Object Oriented, Implicit Invocation, Model View Controller framework?

Answer:
Yes.

Question:
Do many companies still use Mach-II as a standard?

Answer:
Yes.

Question:
Is there still a vibrant and vocal community supporting Mach-II?

Answer:
Yes.

Question:
Given the release of Model-Glue, has Mach-II in some way become obsolete?

Answer:
No. Both of these frameworks ultimately solve the same problems.

Question:
Is Mach-II a stable and functional framework?

Answer:
Yes.

What I’m really saying is that even though the initial comparison between Model-Glue and Mach-II may produce a feeling that Mach-II is somehow dying, it doesn’t actually indicate that it is. Mach-II today is just as stable and functional as it was three months ago, before the release of Model-Glue. Did we hear pundits spouting “fear, uncertainty and doubt” then? No!

The real upshot of this situation is twofold:

One, if you like Mach-II, you have many useful years in which you can keep using Mach-II. It’s not dead. It’s not dying.

Two, the more we as a community discuss this type of topic, the more developers are going to take notice. Hopefully these developers will feel compelled to learn more about and begin applying Object Oriented Programming, design patterns and modern programming techniques. This might help ColdFusion resolve some of its perceived image problems, which benefits us all.

In summary, neither Mach-II or Model-Glue are dead. We should all feel compelled to learn more about and lend support to both however we can.

Comments on: "Mach II, Alive and Kicking!" (6)

  1. Scott Stroz said:

    Hethen!!!!

    Just kidding :-p

    Like

  2. Cliff Meyers said:

    I’ve been using Mach-II since January and generally I like it quite a bit. I am concerned at the lack of improvements to the framework of late; the last release was made almost 9 months ago. Model-Glue continues to be improved with each release. Based on current activity it seems to me that MG will quickly grow to encompass more functionality than M2 provides. It’s possible that MG could fizzle out as soon as it reaches some unknown critical user mass, but I suspect that Joe’s motivation for building MG (given the many similarities to M2) is that he wanted a framework that would continue to be improved over time. That being said, I’m heavily considering dropping M2 and using MG for future development.

    Like

  3. I think the point is that Mach II needs to be fully OSS to grow. But once it is, there needs to be structures around it so the growth is for the good of the community.

    The same may be said of model-glue in the long run.

    Like

  4. Robby Lansaw said:

    For the record, Mach-II *IS* fully OSS, it’s based on the Apache License. However, it’s also a base for which training is sold. That being said, while it’s fully functional as is, there is NO reason why someone else can’t come in and modify it at their will.

    Like

  5. Kyle Hayes said:

    You may want to change the reference to MachII.info. I don’t think the site is the same as it was when this entry was written.

    Like

  6. Doug Hughes said:

    Actually, that should be mach-ii.info.

    Like

Comments are closed.

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: