Ingo, Thank you for the clarification. I guess I was just looking for an 'if(clientPlatform == ".NET")' clause when the server platform is not .NET. I can see what you mean now.
Kevin Burton .NET Common Language Runtime Unleashed -----Original Message----- From: Ingo Rammer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, May 02, 2002 12:13 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [DOTNET] remoting vs. web services Kevin, No, I only said that if the server platform isn't .NET you might be looking at a Java server instead ;-). This wasn't meant to say .NET's better or worse than Java. I worked with both of them for some time ... -Ingo Author of "Advanced .NET Remoting" http://www.dotnetremoting.cc > -----Original Message----- > From: Kevin Burton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, May 02, 2002 7:03 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [DOTNET] remoting vs. web services > > > Ingo, > > If the server platform is not .NET are you saying that Java is faster, > better, easier? I have built remoting applications that talk > HTTP/SOAP with > non-.NET servers and it seems to work fine. > > Kevin Burton > .NET Common Language Runtime Unleashed > > -----Original Message----- > From: Ingo Rammer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, May 02, 2002 10:57 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [DOTNET] remoting vs. web services > > Hmm ... actually I guess it's more like this ;-) > > if (serverPlatform == ".NET") { > if (clientPlatform == ".NET") { > return "Remoting"; > } else { > return "ASP.NET Web Services"; > } > } else { > return "You're talking 'bout Java here?"; > } > > .NET Remoting and ASP.NET have the same degree of support for > firewall-configurations. Even when using HTTP, you can go for the > BinaryFormatter in Remoting which will be faster ... > > just my 2c, > -Ingo > > Author of "Advanced .NET Remoting" > http://www.dotnetremoting.cc You can read messages from the DOTNET archive, unsubscribe from DOTNET, or subscribe to other DevelopMentor lists at http://discuss.develop.com.
