My take is this.   If any of this is going to survive the client has to
be ubiquitous and free.   Whether you believe in Open Source or not,
there seems to be way too much evidence that if you try to milk both
ends of the cow (client and server) you don't get far these days.  
Doesn't matter whether the total functionality is better or not.  (BTW,
a quick look at IBM's revenue stream Services vs. Product, should be an
effective way to get the message across).

I am continually perplexed by some of the IBM/Transarc marketing
decisions.  There seems to be a continual push for some new sort of
client or gateway product, with a per seat charge.    I see no purpose
for things like DFS Connect and DFS Lite.  

In addition, important things like OS/2, Linux or *BSD native AFS
clients and MR-AFS are left by the wayside! 
No evidence of any Transarc bandwidth going to Disconnected cm's/Coda
function.  Existing AFS customers have been screaming for stuff like
this for years.  The attitude from Transarc seems to be, "Ok, buy a
source license and have fun!".  I have long hoped that maybe by watching
what DEC, Apple, Netscape, and Sun (read about their recent announcement
to throw resources at Linux on Ultra-Sparc) have all done recently, that
maybe someone at IBM would get a hint.   

I believe that something like AFS will still exist years from now.   My
bet is that it will be some sort of non-proprietary work-alike off of
the Internet, though.

-- 
Chris Cowan                       
[EMAIL PROTECTED]                 
512-342-3635 (always)
614-677-3784 (until 6/1/98)
begin:          vcard
fn:             Chris Cowan
n:              Cowan;Chris
org:            PSW Technologies, BSS
adr;dom:        6300 Bridgepoint Pkwy;;Bldg 3, Suite 200;Austin;TX;78730;
email;internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
title:          Senior Software Engineer
tel;work:       512-342-3635
tel;fax:        512-345-4976
x-mozilla-cpt:  ;0
x-mozilla-html: FALSE
version:        2.1
end:            vcard

Reply via email to