Comments on Ajax versus SOA and Smart Clients

For those of you who know Swedish, there’s some interesting discussion (post 1, post 2, with comments) at Dag König’s blog, related to my previous two posts (post 1, post 2) about Ajax versus Smart Clients. For those who don’t, here’s a summary from my perspective:

In his first post, Dag says that the internal email sent by Bill Gates recently fits very well into the SOA view of developing software.

Then, I comment on this, stating that the Web 2.0 way of developing applications rather focuses on  more "lightweight" technologies (since SOA development is usually viewed as more "heavyweight"), and Microsoft "turning ship" could instead mean that they are  turning away from their SOA focus (they won’t skip it, I’m sure). But I say that probably Microsoft will probably win this battle anyway, due to their effort on Smart Clients: those will be needed to make use of the Web 2.0 services when we’re not online (that still happens, and will happen to many people, occasionally during the coming few years).

Dag replies in a second post that when the Web 2.0 services will be used for more important services, we’ll see that more of a SOA view (and associated technologies) will be necessary (several Web 2.0 services are publishing external APIs). And that Microsoft will get to show its advantages (they’ve invested a lot into SOA) when that time comes. In addition, it’s possible to be online more and more of the time, so the importance of offline clients decreases. But nevertheless, there are technologies that bridge the two worlds: click-once and Java applets.

My comment to that post is that I agree that when for example digital identity management will be required for those services, we’ll probably see more heavyweight protocols being used. But there’s no immediate pressure for using SOA at the moment. And that those bridging technologies are actually the smart clients (where Microsoft will get its payback, as commented in my previous post).

End of discussion, so far. Looking forward to more discussions of this kind! 🙂


Wasting Your Time

Ha, this was just too funny! Don’t blame me if you cant’ stop…

Via Scobleizer.

Spam and Evolution

I often catch myself trying to find what’s positive even about the most negative things. Take spam and phishing, for example. Bad, bad. But due to those, we’re getting good things like systems for handling digital identity, so that we can safely keep track of our digital secrets, like our credit cards. That’s not useful only for stopping spam and phishing, it makes us trust the net more, so that people will use and make more services, and the net will grow.

And those hackers exploiting security holes in Windows, commanding armies of zombie machines to send spam all over the planet. Bad. But didn’t that make Microsoft finally focus on security? And it isn’t good only for stopping hackers, it will make the OS more stable and better functionally partitioned (I hope).

A parallel from evolution: if the climate had been always hot everywhere on the planet, the dinosaurs wouldn’t ever have gotten feathers. But it wasn’t, and feathers enabled them to evolve into birds, since feathers could be used not only for keeping them warm.

Over and over again, you see lots of examples where an evolutionary pressure causes something to evolve, that can be used for something else later. The same things are happening on the net, only quicker. But people are still complaining that finding a solution to the spam problem takes a long time!

So in the long run, spam is good. Just trust (and join!) the internet evolution.

Offline Task Handling Application

In a recent post, I complained about Ajax applications, in particular Remember the Milk, and how the requirement to have an online connection at all times makes it impossible to handle your tasks whenever you want to. I really needed an offline-able application for that! And I hoped that it wouldn’t be Outlook, because I felt it’s not flexible enough. But turned out to be Outlook after all!
I checked out David Allen‘s GTD plugin for Outlook, and now I’m sold on that one. The only problem was that I first needed to get a backup routine in place in order to consider Outlook a "trusted system" (which Remember the Milk is unfortunately not).

In Search of Conceptual Integrity

Search engines are indeed very strange. On Google, I’m number one on "conceptual integrity". Same on MSN Search. But on Yahoo, I’m number thirty-six. I doubt that anyone would be consulting my blog as the number one reference on conceptual integrity! But I promise, I will be writing something directly connected to that topic, sooner or later!

The searches: