On Thu, 13 Apr 2000 12:44:49 +0200, Christophe Warland
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
><customer>
>I would like to point out a fact, which was surprisingly not stated
>before:
>(1) - with IIOP and EJB1.1, I can have interoperability today;
>(2) - with an API-based solution, I will not have interoperability
>before EJB2.0 is out and correctly implemented (mid 2001?).
>From a customer perspective, I clearly choose (1) over (2).
></customer>
I absolutely understand this. And you are free to use IIOP as a means to
do interop. today.
However, if we today choose between two alternative ways of doing this,
and in the future we come to a point where IIOP is the limiting factor
in that it is not capable of doing what we want, then we will most
certainly think "what the heck were they thinking back then??".
IMHO choosing an API-based solution (which will still allow IIOP to be
used!) is more "future-compliant" than choosing a wire-protocol, which
is "easier" but dumber.
To compare with email, the basic text email (~IIOP) has worked fine for
a long time and still does, but we would have been extremely frustrated
if the email inventors had not designed it with "future-compliance" in
mind and introduced MIME-based attachments that can do video and voice
messages (for example).
The same reasoning applies here: IIOP "works", but why constrain the
possibilities for innovation in the future? (and with "the future" I
mean "next year or so")
/Rickard
--
Rickard �berg
@home: +46 13 177937
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.telkel.com
http://www.ejboss.org
http://www.dreambean.com
===========================================================================
To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body
of the message "signoff EJB-INTEREST". For general help, send email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help".
