Gervas Douglas wrote:
> I don't think it is fair just to blame Microsoft (although a couple of
> years ago one of my techy friends remarked that MS pushed WS as a
> means of selling .NET).  IBM, BEA et al. were not slow to climb on the
> WS bandwagon.

But IBM was, and still is to some degree, scrambling to find something to sell. 
  MQ has been popular, and anything that would allow MQ to be sold in more 
places probably looked good.  BEA is just BEA.  They've been in the APP server 
business for some time, and anything that other APP servers do, they feel 
compelled to do so that there is less differentiation.  That's one of the 
lemmings scenarios that is most obvious.  Copy your competitor to reduce 
differentiation instead of innovate to differentiate your product.

> As for someone remarking on the ubiquity of HTTP as a protocol,
> perhaps this had something to do with its pre-application use ubiquity.

Perhaps. HTTP is everywhere.  That's sort of like saying outlook express is 
used 
everywhere, let's standardize on it.  There are some good things about OE. 
However it also has flaws that make it undesireable for many types of 
applications (such as reading publically transmitted email :-)  So, we have to 
understand the limits and capabilities of technologies.  Somethings we learn by 
observation before application.  Somethings we learn from mistakes.  Other 
things we learn from catastrophes.  The momentum of software markets is 
growing, 
and more and more vertial markets are being tackled by less and less 
experienced 
software developers.  Giving them the wrong tools with less experience in tool 
selection is not going to improve their chance of success.

The inverted market place is providing a key force in allowing anything goes 
product development.

Gregg Wonderly




 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/service-orientated-architecture/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 



Reply via email to