During the last weekend, I tried to gather some information regarding the web and rich client strategies from Adobe and Microsoft in contrast to IBMs Rich Client platform. Comparing the three ways to implement mashups between web 2.0 applications and desktop components, both competitors to IBM surprised me with consistent and (at a first glance) easy to use tooling to create desktop and web applications using web 2.0 techniques with only one technological approach (by means, you always have to know about "basics" like XML). In contrast to IBM, there is no need for both companies to change the development platform and the programming languages and tools used, when implementing web and desktop client functionality, online or offline.
I will have to investigate a lot more to get a deeper insight into those technologies (Silverlight from Microsoft and AIR from Adobe) to find about pro's and con's as well as technical caveats of each technology. What surprises me though is, how heavily both companies gain access to the developer area - both conferences regarding that topic were heavily crowded. Looking at the tooling, the buzz around the platforms and the interest of the deverlopers community leaves me to think about IBMs position in the web 2.0 development rat race - I don't see any agressive positioning for Expeditor/Eclipse as a base technology for Web 2.0 / Desktop Client applications. At first glance, IBMs portfolio looks like always in Java - cluttered, 300 alternative framworks, different prgramming techniques for desktop and web components... . Is this only my impression - what are your thoughts on that ?
Heiko Voigt   |   6 November 2007 08:30:39   |     |  
  |   Next Document   |   Previous Document

Discussion for this entry is now closed.

Comments (0)

No Comments Found