>From: Sean Michael Mead <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Actually the whole Java concept was flawed.  Nobody *really* wants a 
>cross
> > platform solution because a cross platform solution is not optimized - 
>it is
> > "dumbed down".
>
>That's just plain wrong.

Not at all - read on.

>Organizations of any significant size widely favor
>cross-platform solutions, because it lowers their costs dramatically in

No.  You are incorrect.  Organizations right now are moving to 
platform-neutral solutions (like Citrix and HTML) - not cross-platform 
solutions (a subtle but important distinction).  No organizations are 
working today to develop further into the total-integration cross-platform 
client server model that was favored in the early nineties.  Way too 
expensive.

>supporting their multiple operating systems (face it you can't use M$ for 
>any
>mission critical system),

That is not correct, either - but a very common misconception.  You hear 
many nightmare stories about Windows because there are many MANY Widows 
installations.  For every nightmare there is a hundred places that would not 
give it up.

>and it increases their efficiency (even though the
>program might run a tad slower than one fully optimized for only one 
>system, it

This is true to a point only if the org. is doing in-house development, 
which is relatively rare these days for orgs. of any size.  Most orgs buy 
"solutions" and they buy the favored platform (Win NT 4 + Win 95) along with 
it.

>can be supported in only one version, rather than requiring multiple 
>version
>support and training, and it can port data and its applets across all the
>systems rather than having incompatibility failures).  That is why there 
>has
>been an explosion of use in HTML, XML, Tcl/Tk, etc.

The true facts of the matter boil down into "cost per transaction" and "cost 
per desktop installation" industry figures.  The jury is not out on this 
one.  For almost all of their networking products Microsoft has the lowest 
total administrative costs per unit out there.  The same is true for systems 
and software integration.

The reason is that they design with this metric in mind - and they are not 
afraid to force their users into a box on HOW they must do things.  It 
leaves a system admin. very unsatisfied when he is forced to do things a 
certain way just because that way is an "optimal cost" solution rather than 
an "elegant" one.

BTW I see we are digressing from topic - lets get back to the point...

Faust

PS: No I a not a Microsoft lover.  I am, however in charge of market 
research and analysis for one of the branches of our federal government.  
... Our research contractors and think tanks can outspend your research 
contractors and think tanks any day ;->
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com

-------------
For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org

Reply via email to