[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

RE: CORBA vs. XML (was: Re: XML.COM: How I Learned to Love daBomb)

• From: Joshua Allen <joshuaa@m...>
• To: Brendan Macmillan <bren@m...>,xml-dev <xml-dev@l...>
• Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2001 21:34:47 -0700

>Has anyone published a point-by-point comparison between CORBA and 
>SOAP/XML-RPC?

You could probably consider SOAP and CORBA as complimentary.  SOAP to
IIOP might be a better comparison.  The three "big" object server models
out there have been CORBA, EJB, and COM+ -- these three use IIOP, RMI,
and DCOM respectively as the primary method to pass information to and
from objects.  Now that SOAP is on the scene; CORBA, EJB and COM+ don't
go away, they just have another way to pass information to and from
objects.  In fact, before SOAP, there were many ways to get these three
different worlds to interoperate -- the difference with SOAP is that the
interop layer is based on XML, supposedly easier to implement than
something like an RMI/DCOM bridge, and so on.  For example, if I have
some objects written in CORBA that provide some service, I no longer
have to convince all of my customers to install an IIOP communication
layer.  With SOAP, the layer that calls my CORBA object could be as
simple as a UNIX bash script that pipes some text through netcat.  So I
think of SOAP as being a universal IIOP/RMI/DCOM substitute that mere
mortals can type by hand.

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: CORBA vs. XML (was: Re: XML.COM: How I Learned to Love daBomb)
    • From: Manoj Dhooria <manojd@g...>

• Prev by Date: teest message just ignore . new to list
• Next by Date: Re: CORBA vs. XML (was: Re: XML.COM: How I Learned to Love daBomb)
• Previous by thread: teest message just ignore . new to list
• Next by thread: RE: CORBA vs. XML (was: Re: XML.COM: How I Learned to Love daBomb)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread