[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
On Fri, 25 Jan 2002, Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:
> It just ain't so. Lotsa protocols, some
> better suited for some things than others.
> HTTP seems to be the most mediocre and
> for some reason, people like that, probably
> the same people who like The Eagles.
One of the problems currently facing the software industry, it seems, is
poor availability of implementations of things. When writing software, if
you use third party toolkits, then there's one more dependency when you
install your software on a client machine and therefore one more thing
that can go wrong.
And, as such, there isn't enough demand for reusable software components,
so people don't make them, so we either:
1) Reinvent everything (my hobby!)
2) Build on shakey foundations just because they're better than no
foundations (HTTP; Worse Is Better)
There is perfectly good technology - tried, tested, debugged, and
publicly documented - to really get the best out of the hardware we have
(the RDP and NetBLT protocold come to mind from my experience) - and they
sit gathering dust with no widely available implementations :-(
But I suspect this phase will pass. As the rate of progress in the
software *technolog* world slows down, then the implementations can catch
up...
>
> len
>
ABS
--
Alaric B. Snell
http://www.alaric-snell.com/ http://RFC.net/ http://www.warhead.org.uk/
Any sufficiently advanced technology can be emulated in software
|
