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

Re: The Browser Wars are Dead! Long Live the Browser Wa rs!

have a browse w.a.

> Karl Waclawek wrote:
> >...
> > 
> > This works only when the information exchanged and the behaviour
> > of the client is rather simple. As a corporate developer I have
> > not come across a client yet that I could have implemented
> > with a browser, not from a GUI capability point of view,
> > nor from a user interaction standpoint.
> I'm amazed to hear that. You're a corporate developer and your 
> corporation has not deployed a single web client app.

I didn't say that there are none, just that the ones 
I had to implement could not have been done as web client.

> Not bug tracking. Not content management. Not issue tracking. Not expense report 
> submission. Are you saying your intranet does not use HTTP POST, only 

Your examples are exactly those that have simple requirements
for interaction client/server interaction. Some of those
we have on the web, simple because - as you said - they
are easy to deploy.

However, the ones we previously had as Windows apps were
seen as a step backwards from the user's point of view,
because they find the browser UI rather clumsy.

Our order entry, e-mail and fax (OCR) processing front ends
are way to heavy on GUI to use a browser. Also, client/server
interaction is occasionally very fine grained, e.g. you
select a category in one combo box, and another list refreshes
accordingly. Don't want to exchange SOAP messages for that,
our network is stretched as it is.

> > And often - this is a heretic opinion here - I would prefer
> > DCOM or CORBA over XML for client/middle tier interaction,
> > simply because XML/SOAP imposes a rather simple communication
> > model, unless one is willing to re-invent CORBA based on XML.
> How can the two halves of your sentence be reconciled? If XML can 
> emulate CORBA then it by definition does not impose a communication 
> model that is less sophisticated than CORBA.

Well, following that line of thought, using smoke signals
would also be as sophisticated as CORBA (just a little slow).

My point is: everything that is missing compared
to CORBA I would have to implement myself - or buy some
bulky third party libraries that seem to exist.
But then the question is: Why do that if CORBA already
exists, is mature and free (TAO, OmniORB, MICO).
And don't tell me it is too difficult to use.
I have been there, and it is actually surprisingly simple.



Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!

Buy Stylus Studio Now

Download The World's Best XML IDE!

Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!

Don't miss another message! Subscribe to this list today.
First Name
Last Name
Subscribe in XML format
RSS 2.0
Atom 0.3

Stylus Studio has published XML-DEV in RSS and ATOM formats, enabling users to easily subcribe to the list from their preferred news reader application.

Stylus Studio Sponsored Links are added links designed to provide related and additional information to the visitors of this website. they were not included by the author in the initial post. To view the content without the Sponsor Links please click here.

Site Map | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Trademarks
Free Stylus Studio XML Training:
W3C Member
Stylus Studio® and DataDirect XQuery ™are products from DataDirect Technologies, is a registered trademark of Progress Software Corporation, in the U.S. and other countries. © 2004-2013 All Rights Reserved.