Re: [DotGNU]What .NET is this?

[Rhys Weatherley]

Bill Lance wrote:

> But isn't middleware what this whole .NET/dotgnu is
> all about?  I know there is a great deal of abiguity
> involved here, but it has always seemed the the idea
> of 'middleware' was the common thread.

In Microsoft's stuff perhaps.  Underlying it all is a
solid engine and language that can be used to solve
a large number of interesting problems, including
traditional user interface tasks.  Middleware just
happens to be the buzzword of the hour.

As for Java being used for middleware: that's mostly
a fallout from Sun's client engine being too slow for
the client.  That caused it to be rejected by client
users, and so the server was the only place it had
left to go.  But there are still lots of client UI stuff
in there.  The original OAK project was a client
project.  All this middleware and server stuff came
later when Sun failed to build a compelling client
system.

> I can appreciate your aversion to the
> commodity browser as an interface.  It is most
> certainly less than ideal for any one particular
> application use, but it does have the unique character
> of being ubiquitous.

Being ubiquitous is part of the problem.  If all one has
is a browser, everything looks like a Web page.  But the
examples of instant messaging and Napster show that
alternative client interfaces will be accepted by the
public if they are thought out well.

However, we do need a strong platform underneath
that makes writing such alternatives interfaces easier.
Right now, a new native binary is needed for every
new alternative.  That doesn't scale well.

Cheers,

Rhys.