New Platform Support for ColdFusion 10 and ColdFusion Builder 2.0.1: Windows 8 and Windows Server 2012

Microsoft Windows 8 and Microsoft Windows Server 2012 are now supported platforms for ColdFusion 10. The new Windows installers are available for download to all retail and licensing customers as well on the trials download page.

Update: For more details on the specific installers for ColdFusion 10 that added support for Windows 8 and Server 2012, see this subsequent blog post,

The ColdFusion Builder 2.0.1 installers have also been updated to support Windows 8. The existing MAC OS X installer for ColdFusion Builder 2.0.1 has also been certified to now support MAC OS X 10.8.

Refer this technote for more details about the support.


53 Responses

  1. Hi Rakshith:
    This is all good news. Just to repeat something I asked on Twitter so the answer is here as well as there:

    Reading this:

    It says:
    Important Note: ColdFusion 10 Update 8 should be applied with the latest ColdFusion 10 windows installers.

    So to be very clear, does this mean this new installer does NOT include update 8?

    If so, why not?



  2. I just downloaded the new (64bit) CF installer from the Adobe site, have installed on a 2012 box and it doesn’t have the latest updates on it. Still wants me to do update 1.

  3. At the moment I can’t, here is what I do know so far. The installation almost goes to plan, except that when the option to have the administrator launched to finish the installation I get an error message with the url and a message that states class not registered.

    No big deal, so I manually go to the administrator and there is a blank screen. Go into the logs and there is nothing to indicate what is not working or if it did error. All the logs show is a successful start up, and there doesn’t appear to be any problems in the Windows Logs either, looking for failure to install or something.

    Have tried to remove the connectors, and re-install a number of times, with the same results.

    At this stage, I have no idea what the issue is or what is occurring.

  4. @Break: Yes. You need to be on CF10 to use CF on Win 8 and Win Server 2012.

    @Andrew: Strange. Win 8 or Win Server 2012? Please let us know if you are able to get more information or make some progress. We did not encounter this during our testing as well as from the limited pre-release that we had for new platform support.

  5. When I upgraded to win8 not only did CF stop working but I cannot uninstall CF10 that was there prior to this release. Anyone have any ideas? I also have a lisc version of CF 9 that I have not touched thinking that might get fixed also.

  6. Ok all is good now.

    The problem was related to the fact that if the jkarta was not previously removed, hence it was manually set up, it would not throw an error but refused to work.

    Once I removed the cfide and jakarta from the default web site, and re applied the wsconfig, it all began working again.

    But I did notice that although ColdFusion will run without the CGI part of IIS enabled, the installation still asks that it be added.

    Considering that ColdFusion runs in application pool integrated, the CGI is actually obsolete for ColdFusion. Even all Microsofts KB articles clearly state that any application that runs in integrated mode the CGI is not required.

    So my question is why is this a requirement?

  7. I just installed CF10 on IIS/Windows 8, and the installation went fine, but when it takes me to the admin page I am getting a 500 internal server error. The handler mappings exist in IIS and I have the IIS features enabled including CGI. I am not finding anything in the logs. I uninstalled and ran the install from scratch again after rebooting. Same error. Any advice?

  8. @Kiran, also here is what Adobe are saying to us. Because we use modern installations and software, we are being forced to install something that is obsolete and not needed, all because anyone who has to use classic mode is too lazy to make sure they have CGI installed in the first place.

    In other words one should not be forced to have something installed that is not needed, and any administrator who is worth their status as Administrator should know that they have to run CGI for any classic pools to begin with.

    The point is ColdFusion will work and run in both modes fine, and if a developer has to switch the application pool mode after installation then it becomes their responsibility to make sure they switch on CGI and not Adobe’s for forcing everyone to have it installed when it will not be used by 99% of installations.

  9. Turns out my installation was fine. The 500 internal server error I encountered was my fault for setting the “Enable 32-Bit Application” advanced setting to true in IIS for the default application pool. Once I set this to false (duh) she fired right up.

  10. I was also getting the blank page when starting administrator for the first time after install. As well as removing the jakarta and cfide virtual directories I also had to remove all the ISAPI filters and handler mappings I had manually created when forcing a previous install on WIndows 8.

    Run wsconfig and remove IIS, manually remove the above components then reun wsconfig again. All works now.

  11. @Kiran – A bug E/R was raised, because the way I see it is this. Classic Application Pools are for ISAPI and other CGI filters that are using the older .Net 2.0 framework.

    This is the issue, because if you read the Technotes and KB articles, that means ColdFusion doesn’t require the CGI mode as it’s ISAPI doesn’t use the .Net 2.0 framework.

    If any website is in classic mode then it is up to the Administrator of the website to make sure that the Application it uses to turn CGI mode for IIS on, and not the job of ColdFusion.

    Now I have asked many times why CGI has become a requirement, because of these factors and why the bug has already been raised.

    If this assumption is wrong on my part I am open to understanding it further, but as I take it at the moment ColdFusion doesn’t run needing the .Net 2.0 framework so it becomes one step we have to do for no reason what so ever.

  12. @Andrew: You are wrong to assume that no one uses XP because you and the other people you know, don’t. We have data to back this claim. In addition to that, the CF10 support matrix supports XP. We cannot go about dropping this platform. I am hoping that we can this discussion and accept that we do need to support older versions.

  13. @Rakshith – Nobody is asking you to drop the support, but one does have to ask why someone would do a check to see if CGI is enabled for those versions of IIS when there is no such thing as CGI modes for those versions of IIS.

  14. @Rackshith while I would not ask to drop XP support it seems to be a misfire to support XP on a release when MS says they are dropping support AND not support the next OS version that was in beta that Adobe could have taken advantage of.

  15. What I find bemusing here is that Adobe still support XP which entered it’s EOL lifecycle in 2005… two years before Adobe’s own ColdFusion 8 product was even released, and Adobe no longer support *that*.

  16. @John: I agree that Microsoft will soon stop supporting Windows XP, and you will see us stopping support with the next version.

    To make it clear, We will not follow the Microsoft release cycle to support the next OS version. While there could be a few who would like to upgrade as soon as a new OS version comes out, there are reports to indicate that the adoption typically takes around an year. In fact the Windows 2012 adoption will only begin to pickup this year and increase next year.

    @Adam: Get your facts right. Anyone who spends little time on Google search will know what you are saying hardly makes any sense.

  17. @Rakshith – There was a brief time just recently that I had high hopes that Adobe was changing, but from your own comments recently it looks like that Adobe are not changing.

    At least NOT the ColdFusion team.

    While you might be right in the adoption in production, have you stopped, and we have pointed this out to you on many occasions.

    We are the developers, we are the ones that are getting the crap from customers because your products are late to the party.

    Not only that, but a lot of developers have to migrate and put full blown testing of the environment sometimes up to 12 months before they go live with new servers and OS upgrades etc.

    But Adobe makes that even longer with the attitude that you have just come out with.

    Like how you once came out and said how the installer is locked down months before it is released, and yet right at the last minute some idiot decided to put a check in for CGI modules for IIS that is not even needed on any IIS from 7+, so that even contradicts you.

    So how do we believe anything that comes out of Adobe any more.

    The problem is that what you viewing may be true, you are forgetting that we are the ones that have to say to our bosses that Adobe refuse to release a version that works on Windows 2012, and we have to wait before we even start the life cycle of testing it works.

    And then there is this, the Boss turns around and says, well if that is the case then lets look at moving away from ColdFusion then if that is the attitude of Adobe. Hence loss of sales as once stated to you.

    That Rakshith is the sad truth that Adobe has never comprehended in this division called ColdFusion, and yet all other areas of Adobe have no issue getting updates to applications that work on newer releases of an OS.

    And I wonder why there is an ever increase in people no longer updating to the latest ColdFusion version.

  18. ColdFusion 10 and ColdFusion Builder 2.0.1 installed fast and smoothly on two clean installs of Windows 8 and a clean install of Windows Server 2012. Thank you!


    P.S. The title of this blog post currently says “Server Windows 2012”. That should probably say “Windows Server 2012”? Very minor.

  19. @Andrew: We have discussed this in the past. I will bring it up yet again. A beta version of a OS does not help us a great deal. We will have to certify on final release version even if we have already certified the beta version of an OS.

    Now that we have already released the support, you go back and bring up an issue that is not an issue anymore.

    We did listen to our developers. We prioritized the windows installers over other engagements to make sure we can bring the Windows support sooner to you.

    If your boss has an issue with Adobe’s commitment, reach out to me. You have my email id. Let us setup a meeting with your boss where we can showcase how Adobe’s committed to the product in ways that you are not even aware of.

    >>people no longer updating to the latest ColdFusion version
    Again one of your crude guesses backed with no data. Unfortunately, they just don’t work.

    >>last minute some idiot decided to put a check

    Such statements are just not acceptable Andrew. The least you can do is show a basic level of respect for the engineers. If you can’t do that, then we don’t need you nor your feedback!

  20. @Rakshith – It is not a crude guess at all, and as you don’t apply for these jobs you would not know how many companies out there are still using ColdFusion 5 or ColdFusion 6 or ColdFusion 7.

    That is the reality that I face, and is not the reality that you see. So it is not a crude guess on my part at all.

  21. Hi Rakshith
    Which facts would you like me to check? The one that XP *did* enter it’s EOL cycle in 2005 (not all of it, granted, but the product *did* commence it’s EOL back then)? The fact that that *was* a coupla years before CF8 even came out? The fact that you’re still offering some XP support in ColdFusion, long after XP is dead? The fact that you do no longer support CF8? Or the fact I find all that a bit bemusing? Which of those? They are – as you point out – all FACTS.

    Something else that’s quiet likely to be a fact, but I haven’t verified so won’t claim that it is: you would be doing the ColdFusion community more of a service by continuing support for CF8 than you are for still supporting anything to do with XP. That’s a valid observation I think. Obviously those two notions require differing levels of effort (radically so), but my point was more WhyTF are you still pissing around wasting resources on making *anything* in CF work on XP?


  22. I think you might be missing a bit of Andrew’s point here, Rakshith. I think the chief issue here lies with your approach to getting CF support on the current versions of the various operating systems du jour. There’s no point quibbling about it taking unacceptably long to get support for Window 2012 and 8 (and whatever MacOS you also didn’t support right out of the blocks): it *was* unacceptably long; end of story. Sure, you’ve sorted that now, but I think Andrew (and the rest of us) are more looking at your approach to this sort of thing, and less that “well you’ve got them all supported now, so that’s the end of the story”.

    It’s still a relevant discussion because there will be another CF release down the track at some stage, and there will also be other releases of the OSes down the track too. And there might well be overlap/underlap of these two release schedules. So we’re applying the current state of affairs to how you ought to be addressing things in the future. And it seems like all this idea is being met by by you is a blank, bemused stare. It seems that you “just don’t get it”, to use a cliche.

    Sorry, but *bad luck* if you’d have to have had CF certified on a beta and then recertified on the release version of [some operating system]. That’s just a cost of being in the business you’re in. The OS vendors *specifically* avail early versions of their software to vendors such as yourselves for the express purpose of giving you time to get your own software ready to work on it. This is why there are these betas. And this is why most software vendors spend a lot of time on these betas so that their software will be supported on it as soon as the OS comes out the door.

    You already know this anyhow. You run your own prereleases of CF etc. This isn’t *just* so you can engage volunteers such as myself to do your software testing for you, it’s for us – the testers – to make sure our software works on your system. The way we ensure this is to both advise you when there’s something that needs fixing in your beta software, but equally when there’s something we need to adjust in our own software.

    Why do you think it’s OK for you to NOT do this with the under-development versions of operating systems that your own software needs to run on? Sure, it’s not a direct analogy, but it does demonstrate the point. One that you are either accidentally or willfully missing, I think.


  23. Adam, there is that and the adoption time that Rakshith mentions. He is right in that normal adoption of upgrades is around that time, but we end up with the chicken and the egg here. Because Adobe will update when the adoption takes place, we have to wait and that can push a lot of adoption out to say 18 months.

    Does that mean Adobe now have the right, or the attitude should I put it, to then delay it out another 6 months because the adoption of OS upgrades gets pushed out further.

    I understand what Adobe have done, I just think their attitude is completely wrong on the situation. Especially since the only thing that stopped us from installing ColdFusion 10 was the installer itself.

  24. @Rakshith,

    If your policy of good practice is to not test on and build with the beta versions of technologies we use until they have been out for six months or more??? Why do you think anyone should test ColdFusion before it is released? Your logic has a HUGE conflict!

  25. P.S. I am not saying this is a universal deal breaker. It is a painful reality gap between our needs and the platform service. My guess is the decision is made because Adobe is guided by Enterprise marketing. If we could get running on Azure for instance that would change things. Even if it were CF 9. Expanding the non-enterprise market requires modification to thrive vs enterprise.

  26. @Andrew: You are right. We do have few companies stuck in older versions of ColdFusion 5/6/7. Your statement did not sound that way until you clarified it. I am not trying to justify the time of release for the Windows support. There is surely a scope of improvement for us and we will see how to better it during the next cycle of Windows support.

    @Adam: I contemplated replying back to you with the same insolence that you showcase in your response. But felt it is nothing but a waste of my time. Microsoft clearly states that it will support Windows XP till April 8th 2014. You come back to say not all of Windows XP entered it’s EOL in 2005 from your previous post that goes ‘XP entered it’s EOL lifecycle in 2005’, that is a change in the *FACT* already. I am curious to know the link where you got this information. Can you point to that link from Microsoft?
    I have answered the question on XP support and the future plans around it as well. Again, you don’t seem to get the point. I am not *against* testing ColdFusion on beta nor am I stating that we will not do it. We have done it in the past and we will continue to do that. Not very useful does *not* mean we will not be testing on pre-release versions.

    @John: I will reiterate, I am not suggesting that there is no scope of improvement with our windows support. There surely is and we will see how to address that with the next windows support.

  27. @Rakshith – Thanks, it means a lot that you believe that there is some scope of improvement that could be made. I think that is all any of us can ask for, and who knows hopefully it will be another 16 years before this ever happens again.

    I can’t vouch for any of the other OS’s, but I can’t recall the last time, or even if this situation has ever happened before.

  28. What insolence, Rakshith? You told me to check my facts, and I was asking you to clarify which you meant, because I *had* checked my facts. You were being patronising and dismissive of what I said (“Get your facts right. […] what you are saying hardly makes any sense.”), whereas I was simply making a fairly reasonable observation.

    The XP info comes from here:

    This is borne out by the link it cross-references. I – likewise – checked the dates on the other things I mentioned. Support for the initial releases of XP ceased in 2005. Sure they continued to support various patched releases after that, but that’s not so relevant to the point I was trying to make. As of 2005, MS were phasing XP out. And we’re now 7.5yrs after that timeframe.

    I didn’t say MS didn’t / don’t offer any residual support on XP, and that’s not really relevant to the point I’m making. The fact of the matter is – in almost any way one comes to measure it – XP has been being phased out for the best part of a decade, and is basically dead technology these days. It’d be even more dead even sooner had Vista not stumbled off the blocks. This is, I hasten to add, not because MS had any desire on the part of MS to prolong support for XP, but just that the clientbase weren’t interested in shifting from it.

    So I question what the logic is behind you wasting resources continuing to support anything about XP on ColdFusion. This is, I think, a reasonable question. Especially if contextualised by observing you don’t even support your OWN products that are much more recent than that.

    In closing, pls shelve your patronising attitude and address the point, rather than attacking the person making said point.



  29. @Adam: Let me quote the remark that you made “WhyTF are you still pissing around …” Looks like you need to be reminded.

    I will be keen on addressing a point, but I will not take any random statement that you make that turns out to be on the lines of your statement quoted above!

    XP is still supported by Microsoft and I have recent data to believe that good amount of developers still use XP. If we had taken off XP back when we came out with CF10 in 2012, that number of CF developers using XP would only be higher than this if not lesser. And for all you know, you would be the first one to jump out and ask us why XP support was removed without any notice. But having said that, we will surely get rid of XP and Vista in the upcoming versions.

    If Microsoft intends to support XP for a longer duration that doesn’t mean that we will have to match that with support for our products. 5 years of core support is a standard that we have followed for many years now across multiple releases.

    Finally, get rid of your disrepectful quotes that you seem to throw once in a while to make your point, if your point needs to be considered at all.

  30. Hi Rakshith:
    All fair enough – we finally got there – except for this bit: “Finally, get rid of your disrepectful quotes [etc]”.

    The only text I quoted in my last comment is what *you* said to *me*. IE, I quoted this: “Get your facts right. […] what you are saying hardly makes any sense.” YOU said that to ME (Comment #30). If it’s not that bit, I’m not sure which quote you mean?

    Anyway, if it sounds disrespectful quoted back at you well… yes. That was kinda my point.



  31. @Adam: Well, Adam. What can I say? You have been such a delight to interact with you right from when you were on the pre-release. Looks like it is always an issue with the person with whom you are interacting with. Interacting with you has always been a pleasure. Thanks!

  32. Do you think that was called for?

    If we were to review all this, I think I made (what I thought was ~) a reasonable observation that I found it quite bemusing that you guys still support XP when – for example – you don’t support CF8 which is less out of date than XP is.

    And you got stroppy. And continue to be so.

    Despite all that, I’ve remained civil and have merely clarified things when you asked, and then asked for clarification when I didn’t follow you.

    Isn’t that a fairly reasonable summary of the general gist of the exchange between us?

    I can only surmise you’ve taken offence @ my usage of “whyTF” earlier, as that’s about all I can see that one might possibly take some sort of offence at or have *any* sort of grounds to get stroppy at. If that’s it, sorry. It wasn’t intended as invective, just “insert standard tech jargon here”.


  33. @Rakshith, great on the revisiting how Operating Systems are supported. I appreciate your open consideration that beta testing CF 11 should be done with our technologies before it is released to make sure we and you have a chance to adopt. Even if we plan to do it in the distant future the best time to find the issues is before the products hit the market. This is especially true because both CF with servers and use with our web solutions are not end of the line customers. The people who choose to upgrade to new servers create conflict not good for our platform if we are not road ready faster than we have been in the past.

    @Adam, crude jargon may be common but that is not the same thing as standard. 🙂

  34. @John: Agree with you that it can create conflict that the platform does not deserve.

    @Adam: Let’s get some peace back here. You have always been passionate about ColdFusion and I appreciate that. Am sorry too. Look forward to your continued feedback and support.

  35. Tried to use the installer from developer edition on the adobe site (downloaded today). Using Windows 8 Pro and it was a disaster. Installer claimed success, then when it tried to hit CFIDE nada, 404. Checked IIS and no virtual folders, so I manually helped it out, then no extension definitions for cf. So just stopping here, sure there is a million manual fixes I could do, but that defies the purpose of this post, which is that there is a working installer.

    So going to need some help. You are positive the downloads have been updated?

  36. wsconfig doesn’t support IIS8 on Server 2012.
    Go to reset connectors after updates, removes fine, but then says:
    Version 8.0 is installed. Supported versions are 4.x, 5.x, 6.x, 7.x.

    Even if I wasn’t refreshing connectors from updates, if I was following the lockdown guide, i’d run into the same issue.

  37. Seems that their is a critical bug in this release.

    Bug 3530539

    I have tested this by doing the following

    1) Install on Windows 8 and Windows 2012, apply update 8 and the problem occurs
    2) Install on Windows 8 and Windows 2012, apply Update 1 through 8 and try it again, still no go.

    3) Install the older version without Java 7 support, apply update 8 and it works fine.
    4) Install the older version without Java 7 support, apply updates 1 through 8 and it still works fine.

    This is a serious critical issue that has to be fixed urgently.

  38. @Andrew: I grant you it’s a bug (based on your description, and just assuming you’re not just getting something wrong), but your sense of proportion is missing if you’re describing this as “critical”. What you’ve described is a problem with the Java (not the CF, the Java ~) regex engine in some situations. This is *way* edge case. Not “critical” at all. Just because something annoys you doesn’t make it “critical”, not matter how *much* it annoys you.


  39. Well it is critical from the point that between the Java 7 update 8 and the installation of ColdFusion 10 with Java 7, there is something missing in the installation of this release.

    And it is critical to all those who DO use Java, this is not the only example I have come across that breaks under this release.

    Honestly this doesn’t annoy me, as my production server is Windows 2008 SR2 and it works fine, it annoyed me that I had to deploy a new VPS for development but other than that I am not annoyed with this.

    Anything in my eyes that is not consistent, and has potential to cause underlying issues should be considered critical as more an more people do use Java like this, so that would mean that maybe someone should look at fixing this quickly.

Leave a reply