Re: CORBA vs. XML (was: Re: XML.COM: How I Learned to Love daBomb)

[Ruslan Shevchenko <Ruslan@Shevchenko.Kiev.UA>]

Brendan Macmillan wrote:
> 
> > > The technology is no different, practically, to CORBA. Nothing will really
> > change, just a new set of tools will be sold, is all :-)
> >
> > In practical terms, SOAP and XML-RPC are different from CORBA because the
> > technology is so bare-bones that it can be understood and deployed in a
> > couple of hours by anyone with a modest scripting background. That's why
> > it's catching on.
> 
> Has anyone published a point-by-point comparison between CORBA and SOAP/XML-RPC?
> 

 You can look on thread "SOAP vs CORBA" in comp.object.corba newsgroup.
  // and, may be we will write one ;)
 

> Obviously, using XML makes it human readable; but I think the biggest
> difference is that the latter two are merely method invocation (and that's
> *easy*); while CORBA implements "remote objects", and the horror of issues like
> maintaining state, remote memory management etc and so on.
> 
> Have I got that right?
> 

What's  good in XML/SOAP - that it's simple.
What's  bad in XML/SOAP - that it's simple.

for CORBA, s/simple/complex/

> Stateful objects turned out to scale terribly, so it was all a waste of effort
> anyway.  The simpler, less powerful approach of mere method 

Life is go on. State of ftp/htp sesiion, for example, now 
watched in CISCO routers ;)

In reality, I dpn't think that it is possible to do something
non-trivial without concept of 'state'.

Exception is simple quering and data retrieving.
And in many cases, that is all. what's needded [i. e. XML can
be used in 80%], but in  20% you need in some more poverfull
<like CORBA >

invocation is
> actually much better.
> 
> In principle, web services are no different from any other TCP/IP service (like
> ping, telnet, ftp, etc etc etc) except that they use XML, and have a more
> general way of specifying the method to be invoked... whereas CORBA is (was?)
> *much* more ambitious.
> 

is ;)

 I now see place of XML solutions as WAN bridges between different
 internal LAN CORBA-based systems of enterprises; if enterprise
 is small, it's not need in complex system inside.

// Whay this have sence from technical point of view, you can
// read in our ISTA-2001 article:

http://www.gradsoft.com.ua/eng/whitepapers/ISTA2001/ISTA2001-final.htm
 


> It's a bit like how Java simplified the pointers of C, and the OO of C++, to
> make something that was a *lot* simpler and less error prone, and (by the 80-20
> rule) sufficiently powerful 80% of the time...
> 
> But I really would like to see a point-by-point comparison, if anyone has done
> one, or knows of one (or would like to do one now).  ;-)
> 
> Cheers,
> Brendan
> --
> e:  bren@mail.csse.monash.edu.au                    v:  +61 (3)  9905 1502
> Email is checked daily                              Phone is rarely attended
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an
> initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org>
> 
> The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
> manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl>

-- 
Ruslan Shevchenko
GradSoft: Chief Software Architect
http://www.gradsoft.com.ua/eng/