January 25, 2004

BEA foot-in-mouth

So, Ben Renaud, deputy CTO of BEA, says in a recent article that Microsoft needs to work better on API standards vs. protocol standards, because "The real level where integration happens is at the programming level".

One view is that if this is BEA official position, they've missed the cluetrain. Clemens and Don share this view. Note that Ben Renaud apparently now claims its a misinterpretation, but I'd still like to talk briefly about this point.

I think this deputy CTO really may just have a case of misinterpretation or foot-in-mouth by confusing "integration" with "portability". BEA and IBM are building a lot of stuff above the standard J2EE stack, so this kind of ideological struggle was bound to occur.

J2EE is interesting because it lowers the cost of portability between platform vendors. It also arguably lowers the costs of training and education for server-side developers. This is a similar approach to SQL and relational databases - you really need people that know the database, but it doesn't need to be everyone because of the SQL standard.

On the other hand, the Microsoft of the past, present, and future, is set on convincing developers that Windows is the best environment to write software, and then keeping you there. And they're good at it. The MAJOR change in Microsoft's approach since .NET was released was that they no longer are playing the integration / interoperability lock-in game, as far as one can reasonably tell.

What makes Microsoft's view so appealing is related to what Don said in his entry: APIs are the real lock-in. In the end, if you choose J2EE, you're locked into the Java language and Sun/JCP's vision of the world. With Microsoft's approach, you're locked into their car, but you have a really good view and can roll the windows down. With J2EE's approach, you can hop between cars, but you're still stuck in the same parking lot.

So perhaps this article really shows that BEA has some political ties it's struggling with. Indigo is a radical re-think of how to best implement a distributed system. J2EE 1.5 arguably needs a similar re-think, particularly at the EJB level. The JCP members, like BEA, have the opportunity to do something good, or to serve the entrenched interests.

On the other hand, browsing around dev2dev and talking to BEA techies, I really do think they get the benefits of protocol-based interoperability. It's just a matter for their public faces to be clearer about it.

Posted by stu at 11:28 AM

January 15, 2004

iPod and standards

What's with all the newspeak going on with regards to the HP and Apple deal to produce an HP-branded iPod? I see journalists everywhere concerned that Apple will fail because they're not opening the iPod up to "competing standard audio formats", namely WMA, so they're allegedly going the route of closed and properietary that has caused their downfall in the past.

I have a problem with this. Since when is WMA an industry standard? My understanding is that MP3 is the industry standard, and that DRM-based formats are the upstarts. For some reason, journalists have inverted that relationship. This industry has already ceded plenty of standards to Microsoft, some for better, some for worse. I don't see any particular benefits of letting Microsoft have the default control on this one. They're already making huge inroads into streaming video.

The iPod certainly does support several music stores other than the iPod Music Store - music stores that support MP3, such as eMusic or Warp Records' BLEEP. It could support more, such as the Real.com store, since it's still AAC (it would just need to license the encryption technology).

The issue is whether Apple wants to really remain neutral - supporting Real's AAC format is a signal that it's trying to avoid WMA. For now, it just looks like they're trying to milk iTMS. Which isn't necessarily a bad short term move. I don't think this is the same Apple from the late 1980's. They'll open themselves up to standards if their user base wants or needs it. Today, there is no evidence of that, given the success of iTMS+iPod and relative lack of success of the other stores.

Now if only iTMS would come to Canada and actually support some more indie artists.

Posted by stu at 11:54 PM | Comments (0)

January 14, 2004

autonomous services

I contributed a somewhat lengthy article, Autonomous Services and the New Information Architecture to the new blog/community site TheServerSide.NET. It's about web services, architecture, and how it differs from distributed objects. Let me know what you think. Apologies for it being somewhat abstract.

Posted by stu at 12:26 PM