Slashdot Mirror
On Moving Toward Software Rentals
CowboyRobot writes "ACM Queue has an article about the emergence of a service-oriented model of software delivery, supported by the W3C, IBM, HP, and Microsoft.
They already have their acronyms down: WSDL (Web Services Description Language), UDDI (Universal Description, Discovery, and Integration), and WSFL (Web Services Flow Language).
The article primarily covers the three phases of negotiating, ending with actual service delivery."
or it could be a simple web app with some enhancements/extensions as envisioned by the whatwg, behaving as browser users expect it to behave, designed around internet response times, and thus providing response times that browser users are accustomed to.
currently i'm moving a client from a godforsaken ms-access app that i wrote many years ago to a web-based application that i intend to host on my own hosted virtual server. no more installation issues to deal with, no more relinking tables every time i ship a new version, no more ms-access-on-the-client requirement to deal with... when i have a new version ready i just upload it to the server and we're done.
i *am* looking forward to whatwg-like extensions, though, because the user interface is taking a step backward, from the user's perspective. whatwg should address some of those shortcomings.
The vendor will claim that it is due to either 1) client-side misconfigurations, or 2) unanticipated variations in the environment,
further argument for web applications. but again - must... improve... interface... !
both of which will be ironed out via a Professional Services contract accompanying the software "delivery". The end result will be the creation of numerous roles at the client's expense to "manage" and "coordinate" the software delivery, frustration at the end-user level, raises and kudos for the middle managers who jumped on the bandwagon, and fat wallets on the part of the shovelware designers.
unless a competitor comes along and says "why are you messing around with all that complicated proprietary not-thin-enough client technology for? here is my alternative, which is standards-compliant and requires only a web browser to use." (granted, perhaps a mozilla-based browser, but you'd just be doing them a favor anyway if they're not using one already).
go whatwg, go!
pr0n - keeping monitor glass spotless since 1981.
What in the hell are you talking about? Not only is this completely off-topic but you're also very ill informed.
*At least* if you're going to post something like this, you'd have the brains to actually read up a little bit on it. Not only are you wrong about Mozilla using "obsolete Netscape 4.x code" (as netscape is based on Mozilla, NOT the other way around) but you're also wrong about IE being the standard for "all web protocols" - no, IE is the standard for "all microsoft-only protocols."
Get your facts straight, dumbshit.
- It's not the Macs I hate. It's Digg users. -
I was really puzzled by the three acronyms used in the summary. WSDL, UDDI, and WSFL are related to web services, not software rentals. They refer to the protocol negotiation, server discovery, and work flow handling steps in a contract negotiation, respectively. WSFL, in particular, is of no use whatsoever in the software rental model.
Someday, maybe one of the editors will read the submissions before they post them? I'm paying for their services by accepting their ads -- keep this up, and I'm blocking the ads here.
Slashdot just ran a story to the effect of "SOAP exists" complete with brand "new acronyms" that are several years old.
Finkployd
That's completely different. In web services, you need the WSDL file in order to actually access the service at all. It becomes something like a library which you use to access the service. A web browser served from an Apache server... first of all, Apache isn't GPL, and second of all, the page isn't required to implement your web browser.
Karma: It's all a bunch of tree-huggin' hippy crap!