Stefan Tilkov wrote:
> I've had numerous discussion at companies where they believed
> "standardizing on JMS" was a solution for interop, when in fact they
> had just created a huge dependency on particular implementation.
While I understand that you are trying to make the point about too narrow of a
dependency, this is like telling someone that they can't depend on base-10
numeric values because we might change to base 23 soon.
What's here and now is not a bad investment. What are bad investments are
technologies which limit your choices later. The JMS API will be usable for
the
enternity of Java. HTTP is no more resilent than CICS or COBOL. What we have
to do is stop making so many choices possible, and focus on moving technology
forward instead of reimplementing the same features with a new face.
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/
