Re: COM/COM+ Components running in Linux?

From: Larry I Smith (larryXiXsmith_at_verizon.net)
Date: 04/10/04 

Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2004 17:53:07 GMT

WTH wrote:
>>Yes. COM is ancient.
>>It even has fallen out of favor with M$. They now push .NET...
>
>
> I think you're confusing M$ pushing DCOM/MTS with COM. COM hasn't fallen
> out of favor.
>
>
>>> BTW, the COM is open.
>>
>>Huh?
>>The only open fact is that COM is based on RPC.
>
>
> COM is an open binary specification. You didn't know that?
>
>
>>> Now, if you mean that Windows architecture
>>>for handling COM isn't open, that's a different issue.
>>
>>There is no other architecture.
>
>
> I spent 2 years at SoftImage using COM on Irix/NT. I must have been
> hallucinating. It also exists on OpenVMS, Digital Unix, Solaris, HP-Unix.
> You can write DCOM clients on Linux. Slow down with the confident
> assertions ;).
>
> WTH
>
>

Well, I'd still look at the newer technologies
like Web Services. Why develop a NEW app using
COM, when much more portable/standard technologies
are available? COM may, or may not, be available
for all target platforms. We dumped COM for Web
Services several years ago and have zero problems;
COM was a big support issue in our heterogeneous
network.

Regards,
Larry 

-- 
Anti-spam address, change each 'X' to '.' to reply directly.