That is just not so. There are nearly as many problems deploying something
as a browser application as there are deploying a traditional "fat" client.
Just look at the different varieties of browsers, browser versions, java
versions, java virtual machines, versions of java virtual machines and the
massive number of combinations of each.
Browser applications are sensitive to all that, and they fail just as easily
as anything else.
And what is more, a "fat" application, can be managed with several thin
client application servers, Citrix being the premier manager, and about a
half dozen other major managers below it. The other managers range in cost
from almost as much as Citrix to free.
I do not buy off that "browser applications" work as well as "fat client"
applications, nor with a little intelligent design, are they more difficult
to deploy, manage or update.
I do contend that a fat client application also usually looks better and had
far less restrictions on its user interface than does a java based web
application. Usually runs faster too.
-Paul
-----Original Message-----
From: rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx [
mailto:rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Raul A. Jager W.
Sent: Friday, April 13, 2007 2:56 PM
To: RPG programming on the AS400 / iSeries
Subject: Re: What do I use?
Fat is not because of the bytes it uses, it is fat because of the large
amont of work to upgrade, specialy if you have a lot of client stations.
A browser may be bigger than the fat client, but it can run on any
computer, and it can connect to lots of servers.
midrange.com
