Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Microsoft

Microsoft Gives Up on Hailstorm 624

Dephex Twin writes "According to a NYTimes article: due to lack of 3rd-party support for Microsoft's "Persona" (originally codenamed "Hailstorm"), the company has been forced to dump the project. It seems the companies didn't like having a middleman between them and the consumers. As a person worried about the future with .NET, this is a bit of a relief."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Microsoft Gives Up on Hailstorm

Comments Filter:
  • by alyandon ( 163926 ) on Wednesday April 10, 2002 @11:52PM (#3321112) Homepage
    http://arstechnica.com/paedia/n/net/net-1.html

    For those that are interested in learning what .NET actual is and is not. The article gives a nice broad technical overview.
  • by bigmouth_strikes ( 224629 ) on Wednesday April 10, 2002 @11:56PM (#3321130) Journal
    This isn't exactly the first time Microsoft has chosen to scrap a project that has been so heavily advertised, but it's definitely one of the most prestigious ones they have cancelled.

    Hailstorm/Persona was supposed to be a .NET service that "authenticates users, provides the ability to send alerts, and stores personal information, including contacts, e-mail, calendar, profile, lists, electronic wallet, physical location, document stores, application settings, favorite Web sites, devices owned, and preferences for receiving alerts." (from Microsoft)

    I think the key problem for Microsoft is the following (from the article:) "They ran into the reality that many companies don't want any company between them and their customers,"

    Bill and Steve are probably a bit surprised, not used to having people say No to them, especially not the big companies that they have started to court now that they have a consumer market monopoly. .NET is crucial to get penetration on the Big Market, i.e. mission critical business application software.

    Hailstorm/Persona was seen by many as a reference implementation of .NET's, showing off its capabilities. Now it's going to be interesting to see how the industry acceptance for .NET evolves.
  • Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Thursday April 11, 2002 @12:07AM (#3321174)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11, 2002 @12:24AM (#3321242)
    As a person who works closely both with OS and MS technologies, perhaps I can clarify some misconceptions being bandied about.

    First, ".NET" is a marketing moniker, pure and simple. Any MS product in the near term will will called .NET X or X.NET. The latest IDE is VS.NET. The hailstorm servies (whose death was just reported) were called .NET MyServices. The upcoming Windows server release will be called Windows .NET Server.

    The .NET frameworks are a set of libraries and compilers for various languages which can generate what are essentially interoperable object files (except that, like Java, they not not generate assembly, but rather a bytecode which gets JIT compiled into assembly when run).

    The MONO project is trying to reproduce the .NET frameworks on Linux. Not just the libraries and compilers, but the bytecode interpreter, too. So if MONO pans out, you will be able to write Windows/.NET apps under Linux and MONO/Linux apps under Windows. So Mono is kinda like Wine plus a compiler with a Windows target.

    Mingel is not the only person impressed by the .NET Frameworks. They have been pretty well-recieved by quite a few developers. Not because they are very original (they aren't -- Java, and others, have been there, done that) but because they appear to be well-implemented and quite thorough (imagine libraries that do DBI, LDAP, PCRE, XSLT, network sockets, and on and on, all with a more or less unified syntactical feel).

    By the way, the .NET Frameworks are free as in beer, so if you have a Windows partition and want to try them out, just download them; they come with docs.
  • by Daniel Wood ( 531906 ) on Thursday April 11, 2002 @12:32AM (#3321267) Homepage Journal
    Aparently someone doesn't read OsOpinion [osopinion.com].

    Reaffirming its support for the Macintosh platform and opening a bevy of new options for Apple's corporate direction, Microsoft this week is expected to announce its plans for implementing the .NET platform on the Mac OS.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11, 2002 @12:37AM (#3321279)
    Here's the article text:

    April 11, 2002

    Microsoft Has Shelved Its Internet 'Persona' Service

    By JOHN MARKOFF

    SAN FRANCISCO, April 10 -- Microsoft (news/quote ) has quietly shelved a consumer information service that was once planned as the centerpiece of the company's foray into the market for tightly linked Web services.

    The service, originally code-named Hailstorm and later renamed My Services, was to be the clearest example of the company's ambitious .Net strategy. It was intended to permit an individual to keep an online persona independent of his or her desktop computer, supposedly safely stored as part of a vast data repository where there could be easy access to it from any point on the Internet.

    At the time of the introduction of My Services, Microsoft also proclaimed that it would have a set of prominent partners in areas like finance and travel for the My Services system. However, according to both industry consultants and Microsoft partners, after nine months of intense effort the company was unable to find any partner willing to commit itself to the program.

    Industry executives said the caution displayed by consumer giants like American Express (news/quote) and Citigroup (news/quote ) illuminated a bitter tug of war being fought over consumer information by some of the largest financial and information companies.

    "They ran into the reality that many companies don't want any company between them and their customers," said David Smith, vice president for Internet services at the Gartner Group (news/quote), a computer industry consulting and research firm.

    The lack of interest also indicates that in a variety of industries outside the desktop computer business there remain significant concerns about Microsoft's potential to use its personal computer monopoly and its .Net software to leverage its brand into a broad range of service businesses.

    Topics
    Alerts
    Microsoft Corporation
    Computers and the Internet
    Create Your Own | Manage Alerts
    Take a Tour
    Sign Up for Newsletters
    Other Resources
    Get Stock Quotes
    Look Up Symbols

    Portfolio | Company Research
    U.S. Markets | Int. Markets
    Mutual Funds | Bank Rates
    Commodities & Currencies

    Circuits: How Electronic Things Work

    Buy this Book for $29.95.

    An early signal that the My Services idea was in trouble came last fall at Microsoft's annual developer's conference, attended by more than 6,000 programmers. The sessions on My Services were poorly attended, an attendee said.

    "There was incredible customer resistance," said a Microsoft .Net consultant, who spoke on the condition that he not be identified. Microsoft was unable to persuade either consumer companies or software developers that it had solved all of the privacy and security issues raised by the prospect of keeping personal information in a centralized repository, he said.

    Microsoft executives acknowledged the shift in strategy and said the company was still contemplating how it would bring out a revised version of the My Services technology. The decision resulted in a relocation of several dozen programmers in December from a consumer products development group run by Robert Muglia to the company's operating systems division.

    "We're sort of in the Hegelian synthesis of figuring out where the products go once they've encountered the reality of the marketplace," said Charles Fitzgerald, Microsoft's general manager for platform strategy.

    He said part of the decision to back away from a consumer version of My Services was based on industry concerns about who was going to manage customer data. The issue, he asserted, was more of a sticking point within the industry, rather than among consumers.

    "We heard a lot of concern about that point from competitors in the industry but very little from our users," he said.

    Microsoft is now considering selling My Services to corporations in a traditional package form, rather than as a service. The companies would maintain the data for their own users.

    "Frankly selling this stuff to people who build large data centers with our software is not a bad model," Mr. Fitzgerald said.

    Microsoft first introduced the Hailstorm services idea at a news conference at its headquarters in Redmond, Wash., in March 2001. At the time, the technology received endorsements from a handful of corporations including American Express, Expedia (news/quote), eBay (news/quote), Click Commerce (news/quote) and Groove Networks.

    At the time of the announcement, Microsoft described Hailstorm as a way for a consumer to have a consistent set of services, like e-mail, contacts, a calendar and an electronic "wallet" -- whether sitting at a desk or traveling and using a wireless personal digital assistant.

    "Microsoft's `Hailstorm' technologies open exciting new opportunities for us to use the Web in ways never thought of before, helping us to continue to deliver service that is truly unmatched in the industry," Glen Salow, the chief information officer of American Express, said at the time in a statement.

    More recently, however, American Express officials have told computer industry executives that they remain concerned about being displaced by Microsoft's brand in such a partnership.

    A company spokesman said in a telephone interview today that American Express had intended to endorse the broader notion of integrated Internet services last March, not My Services specifically. He said he did not know if the company had discussions with Microsoft about becoming a My Services repository.

    Several industry consultants who work with Microsoft said that the company was now planning to deploy My Services as a software product for corporate computer users some time next year, after the company introduces its .Net operating system.

    "Enterprise customers were telling Microsoft, `We like this idea but we don't want to be part of this huge public database,' " said Matt Rosoff, an analyst who follows the company at Directions on Microsoft, a market research firm in Kirkland, Wash.

    When it was introduced, the Hailstorm plan quickly became a lightning rod for privacy advocates who saw dangers in concentrating vast amounts of personal information in a single repository.

    Last fall a coalition of privacy groups complained in a letter to the Federal Trade Commission about the potential risks inherent in Microsoft's collecting personal information from and about several hundred million personal computer users.

    My Services also created thorny privacy issues for Microsoft in Europe, because of restrictions on transborder data transfers there. Microsoft has not resolved how personal information stored in one country can be easily transmitted internationally.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11, 2002 @12:50AM (#3321318)
    You don't know what you are talking about at all. Totally ignorant. .NET is not the stupid Hotmail and MSN Messenger thing at all, and it's MS fault for making people think it is. The REAL .NET is the .NET Framework - a set of compilers, class libraries, and runtime. Go to http://msdn.microsoft.com/net and read.
  • Re:Registration (Score:3, Informative)

    by Johnny Mnemonic ( 176043 ) <mdinsmore@NoSPaM.gmail.com> on Thursday April 11, 2002 @12:57AM (#3321340) Homepage Journal
    In the time it took for you to post a response, you could have checked to see that I did, in fact, register as dephex/microsoft with bogus info. I suggested that as an example in my original post.

    As for your second question, if this were adopted as a standard, it would save me from having to register every time I wanted to read a nytimes article on a system that they hadn't already implanted a cookie, which happens often enough that it's a pain in my ass, but not often enough for me to remember my arbitrary username/pass that I have set up legitimately. Since I use more than one computer, I do have to worry about it beyond the initial trouble.

    And finally, if you don't like the system, don't adopt it.
  • It runs on all windows platforms except Win95 (which sucks ass anyway), and once Mono is done it'll run on Linux. It'll probably be ported to Mac pretty soon, considering the big business MS gets out of IE:Mac and Office:Mac.
  • Re:Registration (Score:3, Informative)

    by ermineshay ( 445739 ) on Thursday April 11, 2002 @01:21AM (#3321417) Homepage
    if it really bothers you that much, just log in using uname:anonymous, pass:anonymous. hell, there are a ton of these that work...IIRC, slashdot/slashdot works, so should mefi/mefi (for metafilter). pick one, set a cookie, be done with it. NYT has has this login shit since '96 at least, but I'm not aware of they're having used it for anything.

    or, bitch about it each time.

    sorry, that was way offtopic
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11, 2002 @01:22AM (#3321419)
    Where is the Java support? If this is truly language agnostic, why is Java not listed in the languages supported by .NET? If it's a question of licensing from SUN , fine, where's the bridge?

    I think the Sun vs Microsoft lawsuit pretty much settled the future of Microsoft supporting any newer versions of Java in .NET (other than the J# which is to migrate VJ++ apps to .NET). It really wouldn't matter anyway, even if you ported the a Java compiler to produce .NET MSIL byte code you would be dealing with a completely alien set of class libraries. C#'s syntax is close enough to Java that most Java developers should be able to pick it up easily if they need/want to.

    If I have have 1000 EJBs out there, how do I justify adopting a platform with no integration strategy, J# has been brought up before, but without support for J2SE (or J2EE) what's the point?

    There would be no point obviously. I like .NET and I wouldn't suggest replacing a huge J2EE implementation with it.

    What exactly is standardized? The CLR or the APIs?

    The CLR has been standardized. You are not tied to the Win32 API in any real sense assuming that the base library classes provide all the support you need. You might be tied to the windows platform if you need to interoperate with legacy COM/COM+ applications... but that has always been a given.

    How is mono addressing these issues?

    Obviously mono is going to face the same issues anyone faces when trying to get Microsoft technology running on a *nix platform. Some of the implementation issues will be easy... some will be next to impossible to include in their CLR.

    Exactly how many languages have been integrated into the .NET platform? under what conditions? (platform, usage, etc)

    All a company has to do is produce a .NET-ified version of their compiler that produces MSIL (think byte code for Java VM) and adheres to the CLR class libraries. I'm sure there will be no shortage of bizarre implementations of Cobol.Net, Delphi.Net, Lisp.Net, et al.

    Obviosly I am biased towards the Java platform.

    Not really. These are good questions that someone more knowledgeable than I should be answering.
  • by FaithAndReason ( 112179 ) on Thursday April 11, 2002 @01:27AM (#3321428)
    This is not an "inopportune" time; this is exactly the time when MS needs to expand into other businesses. (See my other post to this article.) Desktop OS revenues are flat; nobody seems in any hurry to upgrade Office versions; and MSN TV hasn't done very well. They need to find something to satisfy their legal responsibility to their shareholders (note that this primarily still means Bill & Steve & Jim.)

    As for the XBox: you're absolutely right that it's an "investment for the future", but perhaps not in the way you meant. The XBox's real purpose is clearly visible if you dig a bit deeper into their discussions with ISVs (i.e. game developers). It's called XBox.NET, in other words, a $10 or $20/month online gaming subscription service. The XBox is clearly targeted to the 18-35 crowd, plus it's the only console that currently ships with an ethernet port built-in.

    That's where MS plans to make its money: if it sells you one game (e.g. Halo) plus 6 months of XBOX.NET at say $20/month, they make back that $125 subsidy for the hardware, then even if they never sell you another game!

    And don't expect them to run out of money any time soon. Right now, they anticipate losing about $2,000,000,000 before they start breaking even on the XBox, but they have about $37,000,000,000 in the bank. According to SteveB, even with 40,000 employees (up from 30,000 just 2 years ago), they have enough money in the bank to run the company another 5 YEARS without another dime of revenue...
  • Re:nope (Score:5, Informative)

    by markbark ( 174009 ) on Thursday April 11, 2002 @01:31AM (#3321437) Homepage
    Further, since MS pays its employees less than the industry average and compensate with employee stock options, MS has to keep its stock value rising at a high rate. Slow expansion or a mostly constant stock value won't do well. The Motley Fool had something on this.

    and.... after the Enron/Anderson debacle, there is talk of changing accounting rules vis a vis options. Companies would have to book options as expenses (strike price vs actual cost IIRC)
    I think Microsoft's (and a lot of OTHER companies for that matter) 'profits' would evaporate rather quickly under this scenario. Potentially VERY ugly.

    MAB
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11, 2002 @01:32AM (#3321438)
    They need to find something to satisfy their legal responsibility to their shareholders (note that this primarily still means Bill & Steve & Jim.

    If they cannot find an opportunity that generates a satisfactory rate of return, then it is their fiduciary responsibility to issue a dividend to their investors. (That is, if they can find no better use for cash, they must return it to their investors.)

    I won't hold my breath.

  • Some answers (Score:5, Informative)

    by Carnage4Life ( 106069 ) on Thursday April 11, 2002 @01:37AM (#3321448) Homepage Journal
    Is microsoft abandoning their drive to make Passport the authentication mechanism for *everything*, Starbucks and such, or are they just going to drop the pretense of making it an open system?

    Passport [passport.com] was a seperate initiative from .NET MyServices [microsoft.com] (aka Hailstorm). Passport is an authentication mechanism while .NET MyServices was supposed to be a centralized repository of user information (calendar, preferences, inbox, contacts, bookmarks, etc) which could be queried by various vendors who would receive restricted access to the data based on the user's settings.

    Is it possible for people to take the hailstorm protocol, if they so desire, and set up an independent, decentralized hailstorm network that just happens to not be affiliated at all with microsoft?

    There are a couple of things to consider here. The first being whether there are any intellectual property(IP) issues, I have no idea about this but wouldn't advice anyone to start something like that without at first ensuring there aren't any patents or anything like that being violated. The second thing is exactly how one would use the technology. Personally when I first saw a Hailstorm presentation last summer I kept on thinking that it may face difficulty in gaining widespread acceptance for exactly the same reasons listed in the article; there was no justification for vendors to give up so much control to user information to a third party. One example touted was the ability to move music preferences from website to website but the question never asked is why Amazon.com [for example] would make it easier for users to grab all their painstakingly entered personal preferences and music ratings to CDNow.com or some other online site. I remember emailing the presenter about my thoughts but couldn't follow up since it happened close to the end of my internship. However, it may work within a closed environment like a corporate intranet but then again MSFT already has Exchange which has a lot of the important functionality that would be provided by .NET MyServices like an inbox, contacts, calendar etc.

    Was GNOME MONO planning on implementing hailstorm as part of their .net workalike? Are they still going to?

    Gnome is not related to Mono. Miguel De Icaza may have founded both but he no longer maintains any packages for Gnome nor does he do much (if any) active development but instead spends most of his energy on Mono.

    As for your question, Mono is not interested in Passport or Hailstorm [go-mono.org] and went as far as creating a page about it because people kept on getting misconceptions about it.

    Disclaimer:This post is my opinion and does not reflect the views, opinions, intentions or strategies of my employer.
  • by jwambach ( 151360 ) on Thursday April 11, 2002 @01:54AM (#3321513)
    First off, thanks for the genuine incite.

    I think the Sun vs Microsoft lawsuit pretty much settled the future of Microsoft supporting any newer versions of Java in .NET

    I can see this point, however does this preclude someone (say the mono initiative for instance) from including said support? At the latest JavaOne conference, Sun and Apache came to an agreement in principal that all SUN let JCPs could be developed in an OpenSource environment. Could this lead to a possible opensource initiative for .NET Java integration?

    Exactly how many languages have been integrated into the .NET platform? under what conditions? (platform, usage, etc) All a company has to do is produce a .NET-ified version of their compiler that produces MSIL (think byte code for Java VM) and adheres to the CLR class libraries. I'm sure there will be no shortage of bizarre implementations of Cobol.Net, Delphi.Net, Lisp.Net, et al.

    This is what causes me to have some concern. If we are to have many 'bizarre implementations' of various languages, where is the common ground for the developer? How do we know that any given legacy application will interoperate with this new platform?

    I guess my fundamental scepticism is this:
    Why would microsoft develop a platform that guarantees them no competitive advantage in the marketplace? If this new platform is to be truly agnostic towards language and platform, where does this leave them? I mean, there are various platforms (linux, BSD, etc) that can provide the server side horsepower to drive these 'web services'. The client platform (If I'm not mistaken) becomes pretty much irrelevant in this scenario since we're all communicating via the .NET protocol. What's the angle?

  • by sinan ( 10073 ) <sinan@bozuk.org> on Thursday April 11, 2002 @02:58AM (#3321694) Homepage

    I keep on checking the download rates at http://www.openoffice.org

    A year ago they were about 10,000 downloads a week. Lately it has been averaging 140,000 downloads a week and spiking to about 230,000 downloads a week. That says it's getting close to 1,000,000 downloads a month. In Microsoft parlance, that is $500,000,000
    worth business ( if once ould sell it..) Hard to guess how much lost sales this is to Microsoft, but can't be small. They could have stopped this loss if they had come up with a Linux version a year ago. As it is it is too late now. I take a perverse pleasure in responding to people who send me .doc files , is OpenOffice files. And when they ask what that us, I tell them " Well, you sent me a proprietary format file , and I sent you an open format file. " and they go download OpenOffice.....

    Sinan
  • by nmnilsson ( 549442 ) <magnus@@@freeshell...org> on Thursday April 11, 2002 @04:14AM (#3321819) Homepage
    April 11, 2002

    Microsoft Has Shelved Its Internet 'Persona' Service

    By JOHN MARKOFF

    AN FRANCISCO, April 10 -- Microsoft (news/quote) has quietly shelved a consumer information service that was once planned as the centerpiece of the company's foray into the market for tightly linked Web services.

    The service, originally code-named Hailstorm and later renamed My Services, was to be the clearest example of the company's ambitious .Net strategy. It was intended to permit an individual to keep an online persona independent of his or her desktop computer, supposedly safely stored as part of a vast data repository where there could be easy access to it from any point on the Internet.

    At the time of the introduction of My Services, Microsoft also proclaimed that it would have a set of prominent partners in areas like finance and travel for the My Services system. However, according to both industry consultants and Microsoft partners, after nine months of intense effort the company was unable to find any partner willing to commit itself to the program.

    Industry executives said the caution displayed by consumer giants like American Express (news/quote) and Citigroup (news/quote) illuminated a bitter tug of war being fought over consumer information by some of the largest financial and information companies.

    "They ran into the reality that many companies don't want any company between them and their customers," said David Smith, vice president for Internet services at the Gartner Group (news/quote), a computer industry consulting and research firm.

    The lack of interest also indicates that in a variety of industries outside the desktop computer business there remain significant concerns about Microsoft's potential to use its personal computer monopoly and its .Net software to leverage its brand into a broad range of service businesses.

    An early signal that the My Services idea was in trouble came last fall at Microsoft's annual developer's conference, attended by more than 6,000 programmers. The sessions on My Services were poorly attended, an attendee said.

    "There was incredible customer resistance," said a Microsoft .Net consultant, who spoke on the condition that he not be identified. Microsoft was unable to persuade either consumer companies or software developers that it had solved all of the privacy and security issues raised by the prospect of keeping personal information in a centralized repository, he said.

    Microsoft executives acknowledged the shift in strategy and said the company was still contemplating how it would bring out a revised version of the My Services technology. The decision resulted in a relocation of several dozen programmers in December from a consumer products development group run by Robert Muglia to the company's operating systems division.

    "We're sort of in the Hegelian synthesis of figuring out where the products go once they've encountered the reality of the marketplace," said Charles Fitzgerald, Microsoft's general manager for platform strategy.

    He said part of the decision to back away from a consumer version of My Services was based on industry concerns about who was going to manage customer data. The issue, he asserted, was more of a sticking point within the industry, rather than among consumers.

    "We heard a lot of concern about that point from competitors in the industry but very little from our users," he said.

    Microsoft is now considering selling My Services to corporations in a traditional package form, rather than as a service. The companies would maintain the data for their own users.

    "Frankly selling this stuff to people who build large data centers with our software is not a bad model," Mr. Fitzgerald said.

    Microsoft first introduced the Hailstorm services idea at a news conference at its headquarters in Redmond, Wash., in March 2001. At the time, the technology received endorsements from a handful of corporations including American Express, Expedia (news/quote), eBay (news/quote), Click Commerce (news/quote) and Groove Networks.

    At the time of the announcement, Microsoft described Hailstorm as a way for a consumer to have a consistent set of services, like e-mail, contacts, a calendar and an electronic "wallet" -- whether sitting at a desk or traveling and using a wireless personal digital assistant.

    "Microsoft's `Hailstorm' technologies open exciting new opportunities for us to use the Web in ways never thought of before, helping us to continue to deliver service that is truly unmatched in the industry," Glen Salow, the chief information officer of American Express, said at the time in a statement.

    More recently, however, American Express officials have told computer industry executives that they remain concerned about being displaced by Microsoft's brand in such a partnership.

    A company spokesman said in a telephone interview today that American Express had intended to endorse the broader notion of integrated Internet services last March, not My Services specifically. He said he did not know if the company had discussions with Microsoft about becoming a My Services repository.

    Several industry consultants who work with Microsoft said that the company was now planning to deploy My Services as a software product for corporate computer users some time next year, after the company introduces its .Net operating system.

    "Enterprise customers were telling Microsoft, `We like this idea but we don't want to be part of this huge public database,' " said Matt Rosoff, an analyst who follows the company at Directions on Microsoft, a market research firm in Kirkland, Wash.

    When it was introduced, the Hailstorm plan quickly became a lightning rod for privacy advocates who saw dangers in concentrating vast amounts of personal information in a single repository.

    Last fall a coalition of privacy groups complained in a letter to the Federal Trade Commission about the potential risks inherent in Microsoft's collecting personal information from and about several hundred million personal computer users.

    My Services also created thorny privacy issues for Microsoft in Europe, because of restrictions on transborder data transfers there. Microsoft has not resolved how personal information stored in one country can be easily transmitted internationally.
  • Re:nope (Score:3, Informative)

    by leandrod ( 17766 ) <{gro.sartud} {ta} {l}> on Thursday April 11, 2002 @06:19AM (#3322021) Homepage Journal

    > MS pays its employees less than the industry average and compensate with employee stock options

    The best report on this I’ve seen up to this day is by Bill Parish [billparish.com.].

  • by toriver ( 11308 ) on Thursday April 11, 2002 @07:13AM (#3322117)
    It is a set of services, including web services, that is designed to compete with Java.

    Um, right.

    1. Java is a language, and anyone can write a compiler that e.g. targets the .Net architecture.
    2. If you meant Java 2 Enterprise Edition, it has several years head start on .Net, and since
    3. The web services specs are public, they can be implemented by anyone; J2EE version 1.3 supports SOAP, WSDL and all the other crap, so a Java application can talk to a .Net web service and vice versa.

    Unless Microsoft violates the standards as it always does.

  • by dwarfking ( 95773 ) on Thursday April 11, 2002 @08:39AM (#3322299) Homepage
    Sorry, but they did not invent XML or SOAP. Typical embrace and extend scenario.

    XML comes from SGML which existed before MicroSoft.

    SOAP is a bloated enhancement of XML-RPC.

    Amazing how many things MS is credited with 'inventing'.

The key elements in human thinking are not numbers but labels of fuzzy sets. -- L. Zadeh

Working...