Please note that throughout this message I'm using "you" to talk about the
ubiquitous "Microsoft". The theoretical corporate entity that acts as one
and therefore doesn't really exist.
>> Standards? The Internet was built by people who created standards first and
>> then documented them.
>
> Yes, but what standards exist for a calendar server?
As I said, create one.
> There is a standard, iCal, that is akin to RFC 822, but there is no standard
> akin to POP/IMAP for calendar servers. You could build your own (which we
> have) but then interop isn't so great.
But since you've got 67+ million Hotmail users...all of from whom you'd like
to extract revenue.
You've got BackOffice...that espouses to be the one true corporate solution
for all your "back office" needs.
You've got hundreds of millions of people running your operating system
Microsoft is supposed to be about improving the computer experience of it's
users.
A grand unified calendar does.
Best of all, if your client supports it; other people will add it to their
servers. And if you server supports it; other people will add it to their
clients.
Chicken and egg problems aren't a problem if you're not afraid of breaking a
few eggs in the process. ;-)
> Of course with the advent of XML and existing transport protocols (HTTP) you
> could very easily build a server that did everything over HTTP and used XML
> schemas to describe data (wait we did that, Exchange 2000). Of course
> implementing a product to take advantage of all this is a huge task and
> currently has a limited user base.
Not if you make it part of Hotmail and part of Windows...
>> I keep reading about what a great thing Microsoft BackOffice is. And I hear
>> what great things you guys are going to do with Hotmail and it's 67+ million
>> alleged users. Surely, there's some technology laying around...
>
> yes lots, but not the right kind for now.
Invent it. That's why they pay us the big bucks.
>> I mean, the entire Microsoft .NET concept is predicated upon a central data
>> store. For that, Microsoft went out and invented an yet another programming
>> language...
>
> So what, SUN did too.
Right...and they both pretty much suck...but that's not relevant. ;-)
If you can create a language when there's really no need for, surely you can
create a standard that cries out to be made. ;-)
>> And I can't even get a little, tiny thing like a true centralized mail
>> store? ;-)
>
> Not yet.
>> PS: If you don't, AOL or Yahoo! will.
>
> You have to wait a few years my friend. Rome wasn't built in a day.
Fortunately, my needs are about 3-5 years ahead of the typical users.
Mainly because I'm paid to help invent the toys that typical users will have
in 3-5 years... ;-)
Omar is paid to figure out what those needs will be and how to get his
software there...
my.yahoo.com has an online calendar. It'll even email me reminders of
events...which...since I get my email everywhere is substantially more
useful than a dialog popping up at one of the six computers that I'm not
using right this second.
[Aside: had anyone tried using AppleScript and Program Linking to propagate
events between instantiations of E'rage?]
> The standards and technology finally exist to actually do something on a grand
> scale that makes a lot of sense, and can be easily adopted (SOAP, XML, HTTP).
I think XML is overrated and overkill for most things. But I go back and
forth as to whether, in the coming era of ubiquitous broadband wireless
connectivity, clients should be smart or thin or both.
Nevertheless...I still want a (transparent) centralized data store for my
address book, my calendar, and my messages. Essentially all my data.
Think Xerox's "intelligent whiteboards" and "ubiquitous portable workspaces"
concepts.
Wah, wah, wah...whine, whine, wine. ;-)
mikel
--
To unsubscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To search the archives:
<http://www.mail-archive.com/entourage-talk%40lists.boingo.com/>
