Last week I posted a survey to get feedback on the state of cfml and devobjective after this years conference. Now I had planned on releasing these numbers alongside a blog post I've been writing about my own thoughts, but some of the numbers surprised me so instead Im going to try break the numbers down and see if I can draw some conclusions of my own.
Firstly these questions were limited for the most part to simple selection with only limited free text entries. This was intentional so that the responses would be more focused. There were a total of 67 surveys completed with mostly all questions answered. The response rate will be given for questions that did not get 100% completion.
These numbers would seem to suggest that Adobe ColdFusion is still the market leader, or at least for my blog readers. Lucee is a reasonably close second with Railo and OpenBD falling far behind. So far nothing too surprising.
| Adobe ColdFusion | 50 |
|---|---|
| Lucee | 38 |
| Railo | 6 |
| Open BD | 2 |
| Non CFML | 3 |
However when we look closer of the 50 Adobe ColdFusion surveys only 23 are dedicated CF, the other 27 are using a combination of the other cfml engines. Of course we could say the same of Lucee that only 11 are dedicated Lucee and the other 27 are a mix.
To make more sense of these numbers we can now look at the direction of migration to and from the different engines.
| Staying with Current Engine(s) | 37 |
|---|---|
| Transitioning to Lucee | 22 |
| Transitioning to Railo | 1 |
| Transitioning to Adobe ColdFusion | 0 |
| Transitioning to Non CFML Language | 7 |
We now see a marked shift towards Lucee. Lets rerun the numbers in terms of a total count by engine after transitioning:
| Lucee | 38 |
|---|---|
| Adobe ColdFusion | 26 |
| Railo | 2 |
| OpenBD | 1 |
| Non CFML | 9 |
It would appear that Lucee is on track to be the future leader cfml engine.
So that now begs the question of why ACF is losing numbers. Well it would appear the majority believe that Adobe is on the wrong track with ColdFusion.
| Yes | No |
|---|---|
| 19 | 48 |
While the exact opposite appears to be the case for LAS and Lucee.
| Yes | No |
|---|---|
| 51 | 14 |
At this point of the survey we shift focus to DevObjective which had a significantly lower attendance than previous years. I dont know the exact number but I believe it was in the range of ~130 attended including presenters.
For this reason I asked who attended and of those who didn't why not.
| Yes I attended | 10 |
|---|---|
| No - Could not afford | 14 |
| No - Too far away | 11 |
| No - Could not get time off work | 9 |
| No - Scheduling conflict | 6 |
| No - Going to other conference | 6 |
| No - Other reason | 5 |
| No - Did not know about conference | 4 |
| No - No topic of interest | 2 |
It seems that scheduling, cost and distance were the main reasons people did not go. Certainly there is nothing unusual in that. While the cost might seem somewhat high I don't think its unreasonable when we compare it to other conferences.
So why else did people not attend.
That third point really struck a nerve with me. Leading all the way up to the conference I had a feeling that attendance would be low and that someone else had the same feeling only underlines a key problem with the conference.
While the shift in focus to include other technologies is a good thing, I personally believe that the removal of any mention of cfml from the conference site other than the sessions page and the limited to non existent marketing really hurt the numbers this year.
Regardless of the marketing though the majority of people agree with the name and focus change of the conference.
| Yes | No |
|---|---|
| 41 | 22 |
Im hopeful that based at least on this response that devobjective still has a future, but its going to need some work to bring the numbers back up.
| Yes | No |
|---|---|
| 44 | 19 |
Since I've never attended CFSummit or any Adobe only conference/event I cant really say if this number is typical or not. However it would appear that my blog readers are not too interested in CFSummit.
| Yes | No |
|---|---|
| 11 | 56 |
I threw this question in on the off chance that a Lucee conference could be in the works. If it was it should based on these number get at least similar attendance as this years devobjective.
| Yes | No |
|---|---|
| 45 | 21 |
Of all the questions I asked in the survey, this is by far the most important one to me. Before looking at these numbers you should know that according to the TAG itself, they have limited themselves to the Lucee Language and nothing more in their discussions.
| CFML Language (Compatibility questions etc) | 50 |
|---|---|
| The Lucee Language | 47 |
| Backend engine considerations | 26 |
| Deployment Technology Considerations (docker) | 24 |
| New features discussion and approval | 37 |
| Other | 7 |
It would appear that people who are not on the TAG have a different opinion as to what the TAG should be discussing. In fact just 7 people listed only the Lucee Language. To me this is a clear disconnect of what the community expects from what they are getting.
If want want to look at the raw data yourself please feel free: Download Excel