Tarantella is, I think, pretty similar to Citrix, with which I have some
experience. Citrix/Tarantella can be a great solution for making an
existing application available on other platforms or over a WAN. Some
weaknesses of these solutions:
1) Since the app was not written for Internet use, it may have security
problems; that is, the designers probably didn't think much about hostile
users since they assumed the users would be a small group on a LAN.
2) The app may not scale well, again because it was (probably) not written
with a large number of users in mind.
3) The interface will not be website-like, which could be confusing to
occasional users (one of Nielsen's laws of web design: make your site work
like everyone else's, because your users spend more time on other sites
than they do on yours).
4) Printed output can be tricky; Citrix lets the user create a print setup
within their session that maps back to a printer attached to or on a LAN
with their local machine, and I supposed Tarantella has similar
capabilities, but it may complex and difficult to maintain.
5) Citrix, at least, gets along with most applications but doesn't work at
all with some. Presumably your competitors have tested the app pretty
thoroughly through Tarantella, so this probably doesn't help you in this case.
At 01:48 PM 5/25/01 -0400, you wrote:
>> I think my original answer is still valid unfortunately.
>
>This answer is getting closer to what I'm asking, but still is not there. If
>you'll endulge me a further explanation maybe I can finally be clear in
>describing the sitation.
>
>Insurance Company "A" developed an insurance processing system over a period
>of several years. I believe it was an AS/400 system, but that really isn't
>important. Could just as well have been Paradox for DOS.
>
>"A" decided to market their system to other companies so they created
>Software Development Firm "B". "B" is marketing the system but since it was
>designed for a local network it does not inherently have any web features.
>
>"B" is saying they can provide Internet rating capabilities and they do this
>through Tarantella. They have not written any Java. I doubt anyone at "B"
>even knows Java. They are not changing their system at all. They license
>this 3rd party Java program (Tarantella) and provide it to their customers.
>Tarantella allows the remote client to run the original application as if
>they were in the local network (like pcAnywhere).
>
>> The whole concept of extending legacy systems just rubs me the wrong way
>> anyway. They need to bite the bullet and get modern, or expect to
>> pay a ton of money to keep extending it.
>
>I agree completely. Which is why I am looking for information that I can
>present to potential clients who are also looking at "B's" system. I need
>more than saying I don't like the approach. I need to understand the
>limitations and costs associated with the Tarantella approach (or J Walk
>Java Client which I mentioned in my original post).
>
>Thanks,
>
>Chris
>
>------------------------------------
>Christopher P. Maher
>Maher Associates, Inc.
>Actuarial and Computer Consulting
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>http://www.maherassociates.com
>
>
>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at
http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at
http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
