Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
And so one wins by choosing a technology one contest at a time (think RFP). The choice of what is in those RFPs often is the choice of big vendors or consultants or some chain of choices such as choosing REST or SOAP. They may not be the best choices but they are clearly chained. There is no permanent side but there are right choices are right times. No clear winner ever emerges. By the time we get to that, the market evolves. Again, that is the challenge of using low-energy systems in dynamic environments but it is a challenge met every day so not impossible. Look at the document format challenges. Adaptability and low-energy approaches are making that much less of a contest and more a light investment given the local attractor. What I heard in Atlanta was exciting not because anyone changed their choice but that they were clearly willing to do that. I chose that subject because it starts in the domain that many describe in the press and elsewhere. They think they are watching a contest of winners and losers instead of dancers and wallflowers. Markets don't favor the wallflowers and dancers don't always choose the music. Between choices of partners and the market, environment and product co-evolve. Nataraj causes the emergence of anandatandava. It is predictable and it is directable. len From: Soumitra Sengupta [mailto:soumitrs@m...] The problem is in the choice of words - "win" and "lose". It is demonstrated over and over that when presented with choice the market CONVERGES to one or two of those choices with clear inter-op between the 2. If it does not then I argue that a mass market does not exist. There are many businesses that actually do quite well in these markets. One can argue that this choice is sub-optimal for many local conditions and these locales end up living with the "tyranny of the mass market". It is not correct to say that this choice is dictated by large vendors. The networking battles between IP, Token Ring and DecNET is a clear example where the big incumbent vendors were on the wrong side. In the context of XSD vs Relax-NG, I would argue that a clear choice is yet to emerge. XSD certainly has some momentum. That is not to say that Relax-NG will not have traction. The traction is unlikely to be in what we would consider mass or mainstream markets. We can continue to rage against this choice, once the choice is made. If the rage has some basis, someone may turn this into a lucrative business even. Soumitra >>Good, this is the first time we do agree. But why this title "The Best Technologies Don't Win" and this trailing sentence "Chalk up another win for objectivism." in your post that started this thread, then? ----------------------------------------------------------------- The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org> The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/ To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription manager: <http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/index.php>
|
