Replies

I disagree with the assertion that "Microsoft .NET does more to remove the barriers that have existed between development platforms, and which have impeded information exchange between them for years, than any other technology now available."

The reason is the statement is not qualified and my interpretation of your arguements is that you are implying .NET has done more for interoperability between Windows based, and non-Windows based systems, and that is just not true.

It would be fair to say that .NET has done more for interoperability between different applications of different languages all running on Windows based systems. But, to say it has done more for interoperability than any other technology that exist today, is, well, unqualified.

As noted before, I do not disagree with Microsoft charging for access to protocols or APIs, nor do I disagree with Microsoft providing a license that is inconsistent with the GPL. I do not favor the GPL. Specifically, there are issues in using GPL'd software for public accessible services that eventually a court will need to resolve. But that is a whole other area and I would be happy to discuss through freep-mail.

". . . It would be fair to say that .NET has done more for interoperability between different applications of different languages all running on Windows based systems. But, to say it has done more for interoperability than any other technology that exist today, is, well, unqualified. . . ."

rit, I did qualify my statement by giving you an example of how .NET has lessened the barriers between platforms, citing an instance in which the Solaris and OS/2 platforms, each running software written in different programming languages, could be integrated without the installation of application servers on the Solaris and OS/2 machines to provide the "bridge" .NET offers right out of the box. Can you tell me that, before .NET, this was possible (using the application types I described in my earlier post)? Of course it was not.

And your insistence that .NET only lessens the barriers between applications running on Windows systems is ridiculous. Before .NET was released I had two options if I wanted to connect a Windows server to an IBM AS/400 machine running the OS/400 operating system to get at installed application code or data residing on the AS/400. I could either make certain that the AS/400 had IBM's WebSphere Application Server installed, and then install a Java application using WebSphere which I could connect to using a Java application installed on the Windows server or I could have purchased IBM's Client Access or Client Access Express software tools to provide enhanced access. But with .NET there is no longer a need. I can call Java application code directly from the Windows server -- or the AS/400 can call my server -- or I can connect to RPG business logic directly using the Common Language Runtime. This is not "all running on Windows based systems." And the programming language in which I write the .NET app doesn't matter. Since I am convinced you do understand more than the basics of client-server connectivity, I am wondering whether you are just denying that the application design structure I have just described exists.

If you want to continue to tell me that .NET only breaks down barriers between Windows systems explain to me why the application systems flow I just described can't be done with .NET. I think more than a few posters on this thread will assure you that it can.