| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
Is the desktop .Net's secret weapon? | |
|
||
| Time: 03:41 EST/08:41 GMT | News Source: ZDNet | Posted By: Alex Harris | ||
|
A couple of weeks ago, someone from Microsoft's .Net developer group called me for the sole purpose of making sure I understood that Microsoft was in the application server business. It's taken me awhile to figure out why Microsoft wanted to hammer home this rather obvious point. Maybe it's because, when you think about it, Microsoft's app server line comes off pretty well in comparison with that of other vendors. People don't think of Windows Server as an application server, even though that's what it is: It provides a platform for application development, where programmers can build, deploy, and share the functionality of reusable software components. And like BEA WebLogic, IBM WebSphere, Oracle 9iAS, Sun iPlanet, and so on, Microsoft's application server is complemented by an integration server (BizTalk), a portal server (SharePoint), and an integrated application development environment (Visual Studio). In particular, I think, Microsoft covets the central position that J2EE app server vendors also seek: the de facto platform for application integration in the enterprise. | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 329 Last | Next |
The time now is
6:25:57 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 116 (129.116.86.41) at 6/3/2002 8:53:19 AM |
| UH oh sodajerk. Doesn't this kinda refute your statement that Windows isn't an App Server? |
| #2 By 1401 (24.74.52.178) at 6/3/2002 10:05:36 AM |
| It's not a secret anymore... |
| #3 By 3465 (206.20.132.147) at 6/3/2002 12:16:08 PM |
| who let the dogs out? whoof, whoof, whoof..... |
| #4 By 20 (24.243.51.87) at 6/3/2002 12:41:20 PM |
|
I thought SodaJerk said that IIS wasn't an app server. Not to defend him, but I'd like to get facts straight.
To his credit, IIS by itself isn't necessarily an app server. I would classify an app server as providing a framework for applications (an execution environment) and providing services such as clustering, transaction support, security, management, and several others. IIS combined with MTS/COM+, running on Windows provides all these features. Additional applications can be purchased to enhance this functionality such as BizTalk and CommerceServer. |
| #5 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 6/3/2002 2:19:11 PM |
|
I'm right here laughing at the irony of Red saying ZDNet is authoritative and correct when--if it's a negative story--everyone behaves as if they are worse propagandists and liars than Goebbels... and at the same time daz, who is usually confused and wrong, has it right. Whatever...
daz, don't take it the wrong way--I REALLY, REALLY appreciate your effort to be correct and honest... unlike some who will be the worse hypocrites just in order to fall at MS's feet. This post was edited by sodajerk on Monday, June 03, 2002 at 14:29. |
| #6 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 6/3/2002 4:16:51 PM |
| Awww, come on, guys. You were all begging for me to post, but no replies? Is that an admission that you understand my point is not refuted AND that you are hypocrites when it comes to deriding sources--that in fact whether skewed one way or the other, you will deride an anti-MS article and praise a pro one... which is exactly the sort of bias you accuse these media sources of... |
| #7 By 20 (24.243.51.87) at 6/3/2002 4:24:39 PM |
|
Soda: I am neither clouded by MS apologies, nor am I clouded with MS hatred (like you). I am not hellbent on supporting nor criticizing MS so I give criticism where it's due, and I give praise or defense where it's do. I believe that people unfairly target MS simply because they're a big company.
There are many companies out there making horrible software that is full of bugs, licensing gotchas, privacy violations, security bugs, and everything, and no one calls them on it. MS has a few little problems and suddenly they are the Anti-Christ. Why doesn't anyone pick on Sun who has horrible practices. Or AOL. Or Adobe. or a million other software companies. |
| #8 By 135 (209.180.28.6) at 6/3/2002 5:33:45 PM |
|
sodajerk makes me laugh at his hypocrisy and just how far he is willing to stretch an argument to justify it. Face it jerky boy, when you said Microsoft didn't make an application server, you were wrong.
As far as ZDNet is concerned, I've never been one to deride them. They publish a wide range of articles, some are accurate, some are not. One tends to have to pay attention to who the author is rather than the domain name in ZDNet's case. daz - Oracle's been getting a lot of heat recently for their sales practices. :) |
| #9 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 6/3/2002 5:47:06 PM |
|
Soda, I'm a hypocrite? So which is it? is IIS the app server? Is windows the app server? Is it only an app server if in conjunction with DC, BT, SP, and/or VS? Please, this article is ambivalent in and of itself--nevermind the fact that it's from a ZD who Red and others have said cannot be trusted for one iota of truthful information.
And yet now I am disproven and shown to be a hypocrite by this crappy little oped commentary piece that actually diverges from your own IIS is an app server theory? As I said, who's the hypocrite. |
| #10 By 116 (24.243.214.180) at 6/3/2002 7:12:19 PM |
|
LOL Jerky Boy I like that one Soda!
I just thought the article was funny and was trying to preempt "The Jerk". I stand by my statements that IIS is an "App Server" but it all depends on your definition of "App Server" I suppose. I just don't see the argument that its not an "App Server". While we are at it lets go ahead and define "the". Point me one time that I have said ZDNet is all bad and never writes anything truthful. Often times they are inaccurate. This is commentary and is labeled as such. By no means should it be considered fact, but in his opinion he classifies Windows as an app server which differs from your view. I was trying to be sarcastic. I don't see an argument for IIS NOT being an app server. Would you care to enlighten me Jerk? Why would you not consider IIS to be an "App Server?" As for MS I never said they were perfect. They do stupid things just like everyone else. Its the double standard that I disagree with. |
| #11 By 135 (209.180.28.6) at 6/3/2002 7:31:57 PM |
|
RedAvenger - I agree, the double standard is annoying.
sodajerk - How weird. ZdNet claims you are wrong, jerky boy and yet you still try to argue the point. "People don't think of Windows Server as an application server, even though that's what it is:" The only person trying to create any confusion on that point is yourself by constantly redefining the term "app server" to suit your lame arguments. That is why I say you will bend over backwards with hypocrisy to try to justify a point. |
| #12 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 6/3/2002 7:54:23 PM |
|
I haven't changed my definition once, and I would love to know the source of my hypocricy... What? did I once say that IIS or Windows was the greatest app server in the world or you just not know what hypocrisy means?
The reason I would refuse to allow IIS or any individual Windows Server be DEFINED as an app server is because there is no consistency to it--is Windows always an app server? No. Is IIS always an app server? No. Even if one or the other was, could it depend on other technologies? Yes. If I said," I'm running Microsoft's app server," would you have any idea if I was running one or more apps/services? No. Would you know what they were? No. If I wanted to purchase an "app server" from MS, what would you tell me it cost and how would it be packaged? Anywhere from $0 - $many tens of thousands for cost, anywhere from one software package to ten or more software titles. If there is no clear interpretation or understanding to the term "Microsoft's application server," then it's either a useless definition (which is itself useless--basically, it's not an actual definition, is it?) or the product(s) don't actually fit within that definition. However, if you tried to define an "app server" product from companies like HP, BEA, IBM, Borland, and Sun, there is a much more granular and DEFINITE sense of what "app server" means. This is what I consider MS zealotry. I've never said that MS cannot offer the functionality of an app server. I've never even said this is a deficiency. I've only said that they lack the product packaging to say they provide an app server. For some reason, this statement freaks you all out and you cannot let go of it after 2 months time. It's just a word phrase people to refer to a product category. This post was edited by sodajerk on Monday, June 03, 2002 at 20:43. |
| #13 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 6/3/2002 9:12:34 PM |
|
Let's put it another way... By the way, my argument is based solely on language and logic, I don't know why you find it so difficult...
"I don't see an argument for IIS NOT being an app server. Would you care to enlighten me Jerk? Why would you not consider IIS to be an "App Server?"" Why? Because it hardly ever is--but, hell, hardly ever is strong so we'll say 40% of the time IIS is not an app server. It is always a web server though. I don't call a drill a screwdriver just because it could possibly have a screwdriver bit on it. Even when it does have a screwdriver bit on it, I wouldn't say it's now a screwdriver--I would say it's a drill that I can screw with. If I was sitting in the same room with someone and we were both using some power tools, one of which is a drill w/ a screw bit and there are no screwdrivers, I might say, "Hand me the screwdriver" and that could be understood through context, but if I was talking to a stranger w/o the context of power tools, would anyone have a rational understanding that when I say, "I need to buy a new screwdriver" that I am actually talking about a power drill? No. That's why I think it's silly and inappropriate to call IIS an "app server." In fact, to beat a dead horse, if I conducted a poll that said: if you are familiar with this company and its products please name the product which you would deem an "app server," and the survey listed Microsoft, IBM, BEA, HP, Borland, and Sun (and you only responded if you were familiar with the company's products)--Microsoft would be the only one where the number one answer would garner less than 90%... in fact who knows what the answer would be... 40% IIS, 30% WinServer, 10% BizTalk, 1% Data Center, 8% COM+, .5% ISAPI (I loved that one!), etc....? who the hell knows what the results would be...? In other words (and what I have said from the beginning), Microsoft does not have a product in the app server category. |
| #14 By 135 (208.50.201.48) at 6/4/2002 12:34:32 AM |
|
Sigh... more desperate attempts to justify your hypocrisy.
Jerky boy, you are really starting to remind me of the internet kooks who kept posting to usenet that Vince Foster was really murdered by a Clinton death squad, using imagined conflicting evidence to suggest there was a major coverup. I still get hounded by one those freaks because I pointed out one of these inconsistencies was explained by the fact the body was found on a hill. His claim... "the police report says Berm, and that is not a Hill!" Whatever, ok his body was found on a narrow ledge at the bottom of a hill. Jesus you freaks are bloody annoying! This post was edited by sodablue on Tuesday, June 04, 2002 at 00:35. |
| #15 By 37 (216.43.88.209) at 6/4/2002 1:35:28 PM |
|
#20. I don't know about that. The whole point being is the"definition". The definitions that have been given here appear to be facts with opinions. One is clouting the other. I believe IIS is an App Server and then some. IIS can help you deploy applications, host and manage Web sites, and publish and share information securely across a company intranet or the Internet.
Such is life...another definition. This post was edited by KvalCom on Tuesday, June 04, 2002 at 13:38. |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 329 Last | Next |
The time now is
6:25:57 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
