Slashdot Mirror
MS Withdraws From WC3 Web Services Working Group
slashusrslashbin writes "CNet is reporting that Microsoft has broken with a key Web Services standard effort.
Apparently the W3C 'is not the only vehicle in which to impact and evaluate a set of technologies.' Evaluating them in a massive monopoly is probably just as good..."
After their withdrawal of the OpenGL consortium or board, this is not a surprise.
:(
Afterall microsoft _is_ the standard, why should you have independent standard committees??
Genius doesn't work on an assembly line basis. You can't simply say, "Today I will be brilliant."
Microsoft announces new standardized anti trust laws...
134340: I am not a number. I am a free planet!
Microsoft shuts down Mono effort for breach of intellectual property rights.
.NET than Microsoft's own.
Don't say I didn't warn you!
The only interesting question remaining is whether they'll shut it down before or after Mono becomes a better, stabler, more standards-compliant implementation of
Daniel
Carpe Diem
It's important to note, and not really clear in the post, that MS is only pulling out of the so-called choreography group for Web Services. It's still a shame, but not as drastic as if they were pulling out all together or abandoning the working group that defines XHTML or CSS. It's still too bad though.
THIS SPACE FOR RENT
As the article said, it's a real shame that the standards making body loss the contributions of MS, since their emissaries were regarded well by the rest of the members.
Two things are evident, though.
One, that MS joins standards bodies as part of a public relations and marketing ploy. They find there is some value in being able to use standards as a way to sell their product (eg, the latest "Office does XML"), but their commitment to adhering to standards and to releasing full specifications of their products, which have become de facto standards, is monotonously disappointing.
Second, while the anti-trust investigation by the U.S Department of Justice was underway and the outcome was subject to some chance, their behavior was better. Unfortunately, it seems as if they already know or don't fear the outcome of the EU investigation, or they might make a better effort to uphold standards, which are the essential ingredient for a competitive software marketplace.
"Provided by the management for your protection."
Lets not forget that IBM, who really controls Java as much as Sun nowadays, is not in the W3C at all.
then
IRaq (the 1U windows server)
IRan (the 59's windows server).
IRate (the 'We are the best' windows server)
INovation (Bills russian gymnastic partner in the M$ trials)
ICame, ISaw, IKonqured. (Bill wanking over windows then cutting up the rest of the Kompotition).
thank God the internet isn't a human right.
I think really more to the point is that Microsoft sets standards. Some of you might not like that Microsoft sets standards through its market power (legally or illegally gained), but they do indeed set standards.
Now as for why they are leaving the Web Services group I don't know. Since they are a pioneer in that it seems a bit strange to me.
I read this, thought "I bet the slashdotters will denounce Big Bill and leave IBM alone". Was I right?
Do they really? Set standards that is?
In order to qualify as a standard I think that it should at least be possible for another vendor to offer an implementation of the standard.
I cant think of any "Standard" that Microsoft has set that anyone else has successfully/easilly actually implemented to make an interoperable client.
Certainly some good efforts have been made, eg. Samba.
This sort of industry bickering reminds me of the Unix wars which Linux largely solved. What is needed is for the open source community to continue to develop and evangelize technically superior products using an open process like RFCs.
There are some who will say that creating truly open web standards is an up-hill battle against the status quo. That is exactly as the situation was when Linux was announced and Linux is now moving from being the underdog to being completely mainstream.
Open extensions to Apache and Mozilla that lead to those to products interoperating better would greater market share for open source.
I'm concerned that standards bodies don't focus more on specific problem domains. W3C, Oasis and WS-I seem to overlap or mesh in disturbing ways. It really should be very clear as to which body we look to for specific technologies, ie. markup, rendering, communicaton, etc. The only reason MS and IBM wouldn't stay and fight for influence on the standard is that they don't respect W3C authority on the technology. Competing standards stall growth and create a huge waste of effort where as strong standards pave the way for remarkable advances.
Of course standards have no importance...
WMA, BMP, WAV, RLE, were all formats that absolutely necessary. There was no other way before to store that kind of information.
C# is also so important! I mean, there was no language before that could be run in a virtual machine.
I didn't know that Microsoft had anything against battlenet...
This (and the OpenGL thing and... well, a LOT of things MS does) reminds me of this OLD joke I heard quite a few years ago:
Q. How many Microsoft engineers does it take to change a lightbulb?
A. None. They simply declare darkness to be the new standard.
GONNNNG!!
this has everything to do with patents. W3C would have been an obstacle and they *definitely* want to try to set up a tollbooth for web services.
MS withdraws from WC3? But I thought Warcraft was doing well!
ODBC, OLE, COM, COM+, WebServices (they had a big part in it), and the entire Windows interface, to which thousands of other software systems have been written.
And I'm sure I'm forgetting some others.
Microsoft probably got tired of working with all the Orcs...
[o]_O
No dumbass, those "standards" do not exist on other operating systems.
hah... ms "stole" their windows user interface from apple
When microsoft criticized IBM, things got heated. This is bad for web services, since microsoft's XLang spec was seriously flawed and is only appropriate for simple applications. Basically if you want to send a CC transaction, but the delay can be seconds or minutes, XLang would handle that. But not in situations where a person is ordering several services from n companies and the transaction can selectively rollback or renegotiate.
Just goes to show Microsoft's idea of web services still very simplistic using request/response using SOAP. Plus microsoft doesn't have a full blown stateful application server, so backing choreography would mean a black eye in their
I wonder if its not the fact that W3C has done the right thing with the new working draft pretty much banning licensing of patented tech in web standards....:>
Power Corrupts,Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely, leaving one person(group)in charge is absolutely corrupt.
Not that I necessarily disagree with your post, but whoever moderated it as "Informative" should be metamodded to hell. I see not one bit of information (no, "read the flamebait" doesn't count as "Informative").
We dont need standards, just make our own !
All kidding aside, they do tend do to this, via the weight they can throw around to force users into the new 'standard'.
---- Booth was a patriot ----