[LINK] FW: Netscape should stop whining about Microsoft domin ance --S. Richman

[Michael Still]

On Thu, 21 Mar 2002, Chirgwin, Richard wrote:

Sorry for the double reply.

My understanding is that you're refering to SOAP (which is an open
standard). SOAP is basically yet another XML RPC setup.

The big question is what will be able to create and consume these bite
sized XML morcels? Right now there is MONO, which is porting .Net to
unices, but I imagine it would be quite easy for MS to change the standard
later to kill interoperability.

Mikal

> Rick - the marketecture from M$ is that .Net at the server side can be
> deployed to XML at the client side. If they're telling the truth, that
> doesn't necessarily exclude non-M$ browsers, does it?
>
> I'd add that there are already non-M$ languages ported to the VS.Net
> development environment ... even (heaven forbid!) Cobol ...
>
> All of this debate does, however, add interest to the Microsoft Eclipse
> initiative...www.eclipse.org
>
> Richard C
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Rick Welykochy [mailto:rick@praxis.com.au]
> > Sent: Thursday, 21 March 2002 10:45
> > To: grove@zeta.org.au
> > Cc: Malcolm Miles; link@www.anu.edu.au
> > Subject: Re: [LINK] FW: Netscape should stop whining about Microsoft
> > dominance --S. Richman
> >
> >
> > grove@zeta.org.au wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Wed, 20 Mar 2002 20:52:50 +1100 (EST), you wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >If .Net becomes the smash hit MS hopes it will be, there
> > will be a great
> > > > >divide in Internet access.
> > > >
> > > > Why do you say that? I have coded a few Web sites using .Net
> > > > technology (ASP.NET, ADO.NET) and they can be accessed
> > via Netscape or
> > > > Opera without any problems.
> > >
> > > That is now.  Wait 12-18 months.  You will not be able to
> > access sites developed
> > > with .Net without using Microsoft browsers or software
> > technology heavily
> > > licensed from Microsoft.  They just haven't ramped up the
> > technology yet.
> > > Recall ActiveX doesn't work on anything other than Windows
> > based OS platforms.
> > > .Net will be the same thing, only worse.  Regardless of
> > what people like
> > > Miguel Icaza say/do, market share is everything to
> > Microsoft and there
> > > is a chance here for them to do the same thing as they always do.
> >
> > Exacto. The .NET initiative is cloaked in hazy marketing
> > terms and excessively
> > vague PR. Most do not understand the underlying technology
> > ... which is distributed
> > objects. The client (read browser) will be executing C# (and
> > other) language
> > modules sent over the net. If you do not have a client (most
> > likely running
> > on Windows and written by MS), you will not be able to use .NET.
> >
> > BTW: Think Java: .NET and C# are MS's answer to Java.
> >
> > -rickw
> >
> >
> > --
> > _____________________________________________
> > Rick Welykochy || Praxis Services Pty Limited
> >
> > Immediately before the big bang occurred, a loud voice was
> > heard saying 'Oh, shit!'
> >
>

-- 

Michael Still (mikal@stillhq.com)     UMT+11hrs