You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to soap-user@ws.apache.org by "Forden, David Keith" <Da...@epiqus.com> on 2001/03/23 02:52:51 UTC
Microsoft, IBM and SOAP
I work with another system architect whom is a little (understatement)
anti-SOAP (and anti-Microsoft). This is his thinking:
(1) SOAP solves interoperability problems for Microsoft that nobody else
has.
(2) If you use SOAP you are potentially pinning our system to a protocol
that has no future.
(3) Request/response is not the semantic equivalent of an RPC.
(4) RPC is an old technology that died with DCE.
I tend to think the opposite in that:
(1) SOAP solves a problem that everyone has (interoperability with M$).
(2) Vendor support for SOAP will be so wide that you can't go wrong (ebXML
etc.) If you don't use SOAP you will have to dream up a propietary schema
for XML RPC. IBM is also supporting SOAP so you may be in a situation soon
where you can call CICS or VTAM via SOAP, eliminating the need to program
LU6.2/APPC.
(3) Request/response is the semantic equivalent of RPC.
(4) Object RPC is an evolution from RPC and a neat solution for many new
technologies.
Anyone care to comment ?
Dave
Re: Microsoft, IBM and SOAP
Posted by Abid Farooqui <fa...@tampabay.rr.com>.
Oh my God. Let me tell you, remind the architect that IBM is one company
that comes to mind who don't have any open systems on their mainframe (till
they get Linux working there in a very reliable way with applications),
AS400 also rings a similar bell. You need middleware just to span your
application across to use these machines with other systems so I don't think
Microsoft is alone in this seat. Actually it is couch that is completely
full.
To top it off the only webserver, app server you can run on the mainframe is
by, you guessed it IBM (WebSphere). At least on windows you have choices of
application providers.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Forden, David Keith" <Da...@epiqus.com>
To: <so...@xml.apache.org>
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2001 8:52 PM
Subject: Microsoft, IBM and SOAP
> I work with another system architect whom is a little (understatement)
> anti-SOAP (and anti-Microsoft). This is his thinking:
>
> (1) SOAP solves interoperability problems for Microsoft that nobody else
> has.
> (2) If you use SOAP you are potentially pinning our system to a protocol
> that has no future.
> (3) Request/response is not the semantic equivalent of an RPC.
> (4) RPC is an old technology that died with DCE.
>
>
> I tend to think the opposite in that:
>
> (1) SOAP solves a problem that everyone has (interoperability with M$).
> (2) Vendor support for SOAP will be so wide that you can't go wrong
(ebXML
> etc.) If you don't use SOAP you will have to dream up a propietary schema
> for XML RPC. IBM is also supporting SOAP so you may be in a situation soon
> where you can call CICS or VTAM via SOAP, eliminating the need to program
> LU6.2/APPC.
> (3) Request/response is the semantic equivalent of RPC.
> (4) Object RPC is an evolution from RPC and a neat solution for many new
> technologies.
>
> Anyone care to comment ?
>
> Dave
>
>
Re: Microsoft, IBM and SOAP
Posted by Abid Farooqui <fa...@tampabay.rr.com>.
Oh my God. Let me tell you, remind the architect that IBM is one company
that comes to mind who don't have any open systems on their mainframe (till
they get Linux working there in a very reliable way with applications),
AS400 also rings a similar bell. You need middleware just to span your
application across to use these machines with other systems so I don't think
Microsoft is alone in this seat. Actually it is couch that is completely
full.
To top it off the only webserver, app server you can run on the mainframe is
by, you guessed it IBM (WebSphere). At least on windows you have choices of
application providers.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Forden, David Keith" <Da...@epiqus.com>
To: <so...@xml.apache.org>
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2001 8:52 PM
Subject: Microsoft, IBM and SOAP
> I work with another system architect whom is a little (understatement)
> anti-SOAP (and anti-Microsoft). This is his thinking:
>
> (1) SOAP solves interoperability problems for Microsoft that nobody else
> has.
> (2) If you use SOAP you are potentially pinning our system to a protocol
> that has no future.
> (3) Request/response is not the semantic equivalent of an RPC.
> (4) RPC is an old technology that died with DCE.
>
>
> I tend to think the opposite in that:
>
> (1) SOAP solves a problem that everyone has (interoperability with M$).
> (2) Vendor support for SOAP will be so wide that you can't go wrong
(ebXML
> etc.) If you don't use SOAP you will have to dream up a propietary schema
> for XML RPC. IBM is also supporting SOAP so you may be in a situation soon
> where you can call CICS or VTAM via SOAP, eliminating the need to program
> LU6.2/APPC.
> (3) Request/response is the semantic equivalent of RPC.
> (4) Object RPC is an evolution from RPC and a neat solution for many new
> technologies.
>
> Anyone care to comment ?
>
> Dave
>
>
RE: Microsoft, IBM and SOAP
Posted by Silvio Fiorito <si...@ntr.net>.
>>I work with another system architect whom is a little (understatement)
>>anti-SOAP (and anti-Microsoft). This is his thinking:
Well, that alone tells a lot. I tend to ignore ignorant people who base
their decisions around "religion" (whether it be MS, Sun, Linux, Oracle,
etc.).
>>(1) SOAP solves interoperability problems for Microsoft that nobody else
has.
If this were truly the whole reason for SOAP, why would MS want to make it
easier for people to develop system on platforms other than DNA? For me
(and the people I work with) SOAP isn't about interoperability at all. It's
about developing web-centric systems (webservices), built on open protocols,
which can be consumed by anyone, anywhere, any time. Interoperability is
just a side effect.
>>(2) If you use SOAP you are potentially pinning our system to a protocol
that has no future.
That's what people always say. The same was said for COM, Java, XML, etc.
>>(1) SOAP solves a problem that everyone has (interoperability with M$).
Look to answer (1)...
Silvio
RE: Microsoft, IBM and SOAP
Posted by Silvio Fiorito <si...@ntr.net>.
>>I work with another system architect whom is a little (understatement)
>>anti-SOAP (and anti-Microsoft). This is his thinking:
Well, that alone tells a lot. I tend to ignore ignorant people who base
their decisions around "religion" (whether it be MS, Sun, Linux, Oracle,
etc.).
>>(1) SOAP solves interoperability problems for Microsoft that nobody else
has.
If this were truly the whole reason for SOAP, why would MS want to make it
easier for people to develop system on platforms other than DNA? For me
(and the people I work with) SOAP isn't about interoperability at all. It's
about developing web-centric systems (webservices), built on open protocols,
which can be consumed by anyone, anywhere, any time. Interoperability is
just a side effect.
>>(2) If you use SOAP you are potentially pinning our system to a protocol
that has no future.
That's what people always say. The same was said for COM, Java, XML, etc.
>>(1) SOAP solves a problem that everyone has (interoperability with M$).
Look to answer (1)...
Silvio