On Jan 29, 2008 9:02 AM, Ed Leafe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Jan 29, 2008, at 6:24 AM, Eyvind Axelsen wrote: > > > I think the point here is that if you want to do this in fox, you > > have to do a lot of 'roll your own', versus with Visual Studio > > and .NET, a lot of the complexity and ugly details concerned with > > packing and unpacking objects is hidden from you, and 'it just > > works' (most of the time). That is my experience, anyway. > > The 'S' in 'SOAP' was supposed to stand for 'Simple', but Microsoft > and others have made SOAP so complicated that the only way to use it > effectively is to lock into their tools. Once you get used to all that > black magic happening under the hood, it's just so easy to continue to > rely on the tool, and before you know it, you're locked into a > platform again. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>From both sides of the SOA house. I have had to deal with a lot of java / IBM / SAP and it is not much different. SOAP is anything but simple past it's deffinition. -- Stephen Russell Sr. Production Systems Programmer Mimeo.com Memphis TN 901.246-0159 --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
