Re: Apache and .Net

It's only as strategic as Websphere is strategic, which is pretty strategic, but really just a front end to Websphere for all practical purposes.

But an important front end due to complexity of J2EE programming, as seen in the ads screaming for J2EE capable and experienced programmers.

I get peeved at IBM and their VisualAge point and click stuff to attempt to replace programming, similar but more realistic concept here I think, that being making the very difficult doable by more.

What I was surprised to see in that Q&A was IBM referring to considering open sourcing it. It's a tough call, I think. On the one hand it's real value if it cuts down significantly on skill level and quantity of J2EE programmers needed to develop a system.

On the other, you have to make a J2EE product like Websphere usable for people to use it, and that's what EGL is for. Nature of the beast at this point, and lots of competition.

If that is true though, difficult for me to see EGL going from highest value WDSc development licenses at thousands of dollars per seat to open source.

Having said all that, I've never written a J2EE app and know not much more about EGL than how to spell it, so my opinions may reflect that.

rd


Jon Paris wrote:

On 11-Aug-08, at 10:44 AM, web400-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

[Jon] EGL is a strategic product for IBM.

I had high hopes for EGL - this is depressing news. With the possible exception of WebSphere, pretty much everything originated within IBM that was flagged as "strategic" ended up in the bit-bucket of time. SAA, AD/Cycle, OS/2, and on.

As I told the Rational folks in Raleigh - whatever you do, don't allow the powers-that-be make EGL strategic. Oh well - let's hope things are different this time.

Jon Paris

www.Partner400.com
www.SystemiDeveloper.com