| 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 |
 |
MS exec pledges interoperability, even with Liberty | |
|
||
| Time: 14:41 EST/19:41 GMT | News Source: InfoWorld | Posted By: Robert Stein | ||
|
Thanks Paul. "SAN FRANCISCO -- Microsoft has long been known for keeping its technology under tight wraps, but at a presentation here Wednesday at the InfoWorld Web Services Conference, the company's Senior Vice President of Platforms and Development, Eric Rudder, revealed a more open side of the software maker. Microsoft is tackling its .Net initiative -- which includes applications the company is creating for building and delivering software and services over the Internet -- with a new development philosophy, based at least in part on tapping industry-standard software used by a variety of vendors, Rudder stressed." | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 308 Last | Next |
The time now is
1:27:18 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 20 (168.215.253.242) at 1/17/2002 2:46:41 PM |
| .NET has to be the most misunderstood initiative that any company has undertaken. It seems, however, that this writer "gets it" and understands that MyServices is an IMPLEMENTATION of a single facet of .NET and is NOT ".NET" itself. |
| #2 By 3339 (206.216.3.134) at 1/17/2002 2:56:56 PM |
| This doesn't say anything if ou ask me. It says services will pass XML-based data, which obviously and of course should be able to be used by other web-based services. As for Liberty, it says it appears that someday MS will have to interoperate. And, at that, he says it will be difficult. It doesn't say that MS is joining Liberty; it doesn't say that the CLI is being ported to Solaris, HP-AUX, and/or the MacOS. So where's the interoperability? |
| #3 By 116 (66.68.170.138) at 1/17/2002 3:04:06 PM |
| CLI and C# are now public standards. It is up to the platform vendors to provide their own implementations. You don't expect MS to write the TCP/IP stack for Solaris now do you? |
| #4 By 3339 (206.216.3.134) at 1/17/2002 3:27:32 PM |
| Well, if there's not a single implementation of the .Net CLI on any other platform, it's pretty damn impossible to say the .Net platform is interoperable -- just the data. Who's going to write .Net for cellphones? Nokia? Motorals? Ericcson? Yeah, right, interoperable my pa-tooty. |
| #5 By 2332 (129.21.145.80) at 1/17/2002 3:44:33 PM |
|
Sodajerk - the CLI is an open standard which can be implemented, royalty free, on any platform your heart desires. At one time, the JVM was only available for x86/Windows and Solaris. Does that mean it's not interoperable?
What this annoucment means is that Microsoft will likely be implementing some WSDL and SOAP envelopes for its .NET My Servers that interop with the Liberty vaporware. They can't yet do that since Liberty consists of nothing more than a pledge to destroy Microsoft. I don't know about you, but I think the people who already have their stuff out shouldn't be the ones forced to interop with new technologies that compete. It should be the other way around. On a happier note, I'm loving the final version of Visual Studio.NET and the .NET Framework, which so many MS-haters loved to call vaporware all the way through its beta 1, beta 2, and RC1 iterations. It's some damn good vaporware if ya ask me! |
| #6 By 3339 (206.216.3.134) at 1/17/2002 4:23:54 PM |
|
RMD, I'm aware that its an open standard, but who's implementing it on another platform besides Mono and Corel (can't wait for that FINE software)? "At one time, the JVM was only available for x86/Windows and Solaris." Yes, at ONE time, literally about a moment in time, Java was then quickly ported to MOST platforms even before CS dept. started picking it up and books were being written.
Pretty weak comparison. As for the anon, yeah, MS ported it to cells, but who's building MS's phones? My point: this is not an anouncement, this isn't a release, this article isn't anything. |
| #7 By 2332 (129.21.145.80) at 1/17/2002 7:15:36 PM |
|
#8 - I don't think it's a weak comparison at all.
I think the circumstances are different, and because .NET already works on the largest, most popular platform, porting efforts may not happen as quickly as they did with Java. As for cell phones, there are a huge number of portable devices that will be running the .NET Compact Framework. These devices will start to emerge over the next year. "Yes, at ONE time, literally about a moment in time, Java was then quickly ported to MOST platforms even before CS dept. started picking it up and books were being written." That's not very accurate. It took about 2 years before Java was available on most of the platforms it's available on today. And just with .NET, there were countless books on Java when it first immerged. And since when did CS departments move quickly? Most CS departments are still using C++, even today... but that's now quickly moving to Java... but that's 6+ years after Java was first released. For you to claim that .NET is only interoperable at the data level is really a misunderstanding of how .NET works. .NET allows programmatic access, via XML and SOAP, to resources exposed by Web Services. That means my perl program on BSD can use a method on my Win2k Server w/.NET to calculate or do pretty much anything. It's not *just* data; any system that can parse text and use TCP can programmatically reference and use resources and services on a .NET system. As far as .NET *applications* running on other platforms (ie, platform independence), THAT is what requires porting. And since .NET is open, it's just a matter of time. So, in summary, .NET is designed with portability in mind. And thanks to the CLR, it just so happens that it lends itself to platform independence as well. |
| #8 By 135 (208.50.201.48) at 1/17/2002 8:49:41 PM |
|
#11 - No.
#10 - As I recall Java has only in the past two years had a reliable implementation on Linux. |
| #9 By 20 (24.243.32.227) at 1/17/2002 9:08:47 PM |
| #12, hell, Java has only recently had a reliable implementation on Windows! |
| #10 By 2332 (129.21.145.80) at 1/17/2002 9:28:43 PM |
| LOL... let's not be unfair now people. :-) |
| #11 By 135 (209.180.28.6) at 1/18/2002 1:31:49 PM |
|
#19, I don't know. Every argument that I have seen against Passport also applies to Liberty.
|
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 308 Last | Next |
The time now is
1:27:18 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
