Well said....

6/29/01 9:34:56 AM, Michael Bender <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>(Note, philosophical discussion to follow)
>
>> To explain: My viewpoint is that of creating applications that use
>> smartcards as one feature of their operation, in a user-centric way. i.e.
>> IF the user has a smartcard, they may be able to use it with my
>> application. As a result, ease of reader installation and trouble-free
>> running is the order of the day! Buggy drivers and installation of
>> multiple obscure .EXE files in the right order and not hot-plugging
>> devices as you can other devices, is not what end-users will endure if
>> given a choice.
>
>We (the industry) should turn this problem around. If I develop an
>application that needs to read and write a file, I don't also have to
>bring along the filesystem code and the disk drivers as well, yet
>that's where we are in today's world with respect to smartcards! Why
>do you, as an application developer of an application that uses
>smartcards need to worry about reader drivers, EXE files, ocf.jar,
>pcsc.dll, etc...? Why don't operating systems have native (in the
>"included by default" meaning of that word) smartcard support?
>
>My opinion is that the market for smartcards on computers is just
>not big enough (and will it ever be) compared to devices like
>telephones, cell phones and mass transit applications. There is not
>yet enough customer pull for smartcards on the desktop. Witness
>for example Microsoft's recent exodus from the smartcard arena.
>One has to scratch their head when one sees Microsoft leave any
>area of technology!
>
>So, what do we see customers deploying in the real world? We see
>them deploying proprietary solutions from ActivCard, Gemplus,
>Schlumberger, Bull, etc..., solutions for which a high level
>framework like OCF or even PC/SC is not really necessary.
>
>Customers are surely interested in "open standards" until they
>see that the "open standards" on one platform do not play with
>the "open standards" on another. So, what is their response? They
>go to a vendor that provides them with a proprietary smartcard stack,
>APIs and complete application integration. Sure it's proprietary,
>but it works the same way on their UNIX platforms as it does on
>their WinTel platforms as it does on their PDAs as it does on
>their cell phones, and usually the top level of that stack provides
>the real APIs that the customer needs such as PKCS#11, free-form
>data store, e-purse, etc...
>
>What does this say for frameworks like OCF and PC/SC? In my
>experience it says that currently what's needed is a solid
>reader abstraction layer, but that we're not yet ready for
>putting a card abstraction into a generic framework like
>OCF or PC/SC.
>
>I hope this isn't hearasey :-).
>
>mike
>
>
>---
>> Visit the OpenCard web site at http://www.opencard.org/ for more
>> information on OpenCard---binaries, source code, documents.
>> This list is being archived at http://www.opencard.org/archive/opencard/
>
>! To unsubscribe from the [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list send an email
>! to
>!                           [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>! containing the word
>!                           unsubscribe 
>! in the body.
>




_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com



---
> Visit the OpenCard web site at http://www.opencard.org/ for more
> information on OpenCard---binaries, source code, documents.
> This list is being archived at http://www.opencard.org/archive/opencard/

! To unsubscribe from the [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list send an email
! to
!                           [EMAIL PROTECTED]
! containing the word
!                           unsubscribe 
! in the body.

Reply via email to