Re: Do consumers even want web services? - Page 2


DevX Home    Today's Headlines   Articles Archive   Tip Bank   Forums   

Page 2 of 19 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 279

Thread: Re: Do consumers even want web services?

  1. #16
    Mark Jerde Guest

    Re: Do consumers even want web services?

    Kunle,

    > What did VB1-6 do that couldn't be done before.


    I recall sitting through 7-minute compile & link sessions with
    MS C/C++ 7.0 on my fast-for-the-time 25 MHz computer. I kept my
    copy of Charles Petzold's "Programming Windows 3.1" just in case
    I have to show some future Generation-Z developer what *real*
    Windows programming was like. <G>

    VB1 was a _completely_ different way of doing Windows. I read
    somewhere that when Bill Gates saw Alan Cooper's product he
    said, "This advances the state of the art." MS bought it, named
    it Visual Basic, and the rest is history -- including VBc, I
    suppose. ;-)

    The first version I bought was VB2. While moving offices the
    other day I found the original 3.5" install disks - both of
    them. VB2 Standard shipped on 2 1.44 floppies.

    Mark Jerde
    Biometrics - www.idtechpartners.com



  2. #17
    Kunle Odutola Guest

    Re: Do consumers even want web services?


    "Mark Jerde" <mark.jerde@NOSPAMverizon.net> wrote in message
    news:VA.000000ab.04969ed1@nospamverizon.net...
    > Kunle,
    >
    > > What did VB1-6 do that couldn't be done before.

    >
    > I recall sitting through 7-minute compile & link sessions with
    > MS C/C++ 7.0 on my fast-for-the-time 25 MHz computer. I kept my
    > copy of Charles Petzold's "Programming Windows 3.1" just in case
    > I have to show some future Generation-Z developer what *real*
    > Windows programming was like. <G>
    >
    > VB1 was a _completely_ different way of doing Windows.


    It was an easier way of developing *some* Windows applications compared to
    C/C++. There was nothing that VB1 (and its ilk) did that couldn't be done
    before. And many that VB couldn't do at all.....

    Kunle



  3. #18
    Mark Jerde Guest

    Re: Do consumers even want web services?

    Kunle,

    > It was an easier way of developing *some* Windows applications compared to
    > C/C++. There was nothing that VB1 (and its ilk) did that couldn't be done
    > before.


    Ahem! One of the recurring themes in this newsgroup is VBc is useable by
    people who CANNOT use MS C/C++ 7.0 and the Windows SDK to write Windows
    programs. A simple "Hello World!" program is 100 lines of C, complete with
    message loop. It's Label1 on Form1 in VB.

    > And many that VB couldn't do at all.....


    True.

    Mark Jerde
    Biometrics - www.idtechpartners.com



  4. #19
    Kunle Odutola Guest

    Re: Do consumers even want web services?


    "Mark Jerde" <mark.jerde@NOSPAMverizon.net> wrote in message
    news:VA.000000ac.04b3574d@nospamverizon.net...
    > Kunle,
    >
    > > It was an easier way of developing *some* Windows applications compared

    to
    > > C/C++. There was nothing that VB1 (and its ilk) did that couldn't be

    done
    > > before.

    >
    > Ahem! One of the recurring themes in this newsgroup is VBc is useable by
    > people who CANNOT use MS C/C++ 7.0 and the Windows SDK to write Windows
    > programs.


    Similarly, C/C++ is usable by people who cannot use VB. In both cases,
    education/training and familiarity with the tools is the only impediment.
    Now, if you were talking about people who CHOSE not to use one or the other
    for reasons of productivity, efficiency, time-to-market etc...

    Kunle



  5. #20
    Mike Mitchell Guest

    Re: Do consumers even want web services?

    On Sat, 9 Mar 2002 14:47:10 -0000, "Kunle Odutola"
    <kunle.odutola@<REMOVETHIS>okocha.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:

    >What did VB1-6 do that couldn't be done before.


    It allowed you to write Windows programs without the massive learning
    curve required to do the same in C++.

    MM

  6. #21
    Mike Mitchell Guest

    Re: Do consumers even want web services?

    On Sat, 9 Mar 2002 16:40:38 -0000, "Kunle Odutola"
    <kunle.odutola@<REMOVETHIS>okocha.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:

    >It was an easier way of developing *some* Windows applications compared to
    >C/C++. There was nothing that VB1 (and its ilk) did that couldn't be done
    >before. And many that VB couldn't do at all.....


    Oh, please don't come back with such a load of old bollocks! You know
    as well as I do why VB caught on! Now you're just trying to be
    creative with the truth to bend it to fit your evangelism for anything
    that *isn't* classic VB. We are talking about Windows programs, and
    the vast majority of Windows programs are business-oriented programs
    to assist businesses in what they do every day to run their
    businesses. When the millions of VB programmers read what you wrote
    about "...many that VB couldn't do at all.." they're just going to
    laugh in your face! As far as they're concerned, the few programs that
    they couldn't write in VB, they didn't *need* to write! Like device
    drivers or system tools, for example. That's because they bought VB to
    develop "Windows programs", a rubrik that covers about 95% of any
    Windows program they may have wanted to develop.

    Still don't believe it? Take a look at all those Basic Heroes in back
    issues of VBPJ. Did you ever see such a plethora of different uses to
    which VB was put? The sheer inventiveness of many designers and
    developers never ceased to amaze me. Your condescending "...easier way
    of developing *some* Windows applications compared to C/C++." is sheer
    prevarication, as it implies that VB was suitable only to a very
    limited subset of Windows programming, whereas we all know it was very
    widely applicable to most Windows programs that businesses and
    individuals wanted to produce.

    Which is why it became as famous as it did!

    MM

  7. #22
    Robert Lantry Guest

    Re: Do consumers even want web services?


    "Michael D. Kersey" <mdkersey@hal-pc.org> wrote:
    >And unfortunately Robert's post (and Jay) missed the points the author
    >was making. Among those points:
    >
    >unless there is a real (cost-effective) and easily-perceived reason to
    >adopt a new technology, no one will adopt it.
    >
    >In this case for "consumers" you may read "developers", "programmers",
    >"IT managers", "CIOs", "software purchasers", "end-users" or anyone else
    >who *pays* money for software or it's use.
    >
    >For your punishment, answer the following question in 2 sentences that
    >any CEO could understand:
    >"What can web services and .NET do that can't be done with current
    >technology?"


    Web-services are machine, language and technology agnostic, providing a means
    to publish your business services across heterogenous technologies without
    obsoleting them. And they don't take a team of rocket-scientists to implement.

    How's that?



  8. #23
    Robert Scoble Guest

    Re: Do consumers even want web services?

    > Still don't believe it? Take a look at all those Basic Heroes in back
    > issues of VBPJ. Did you ever see such a plethora of different uses to
    > which VB was put?


    I wrote a lot of those old Basic Heroes. Today if I were to do that column
    it'd be about ASP.NET. The stuff those guys are doing is simply amazing.

    But, then, I'm an Internet kinda guy.

    Robert Scoble

    ###



  9. #24
    Robert Scoble Guest

    Re: Do consumers even want web services?

    > VB1 was a _completely_ different way of doing Windows. I read
    > somewhere that when Bill Gates saw Alan Cooper's product he
    > said, "This advances the state of the art." MS bought it, named
    > it Visual Basic, and the rest is history -- including VBc, I
    > suppose. ;-)


    I know Alan Cooper and this is somewhat wrong.

    Alan did not invent Visual Basic. He wrote a prototype application, named
    Ruby, that Bill Gates bought. It didn't have a programming language
    underneath. It was a rough approximation of the toolbar and the .VBX
    architecture. After Microsoft bought the prototype it took Microsoft several
    years to get it converted to Visual Basic.

    While PC Mag called Alan the "father of Visual Basic" neither Microsoft nor
    Cooper were really comfortable with that term (although both have now
    accepted it). Cooper told us he would have put a C-type language underneath
    if he had had his druthers.

    By the way, the team had pulled .VBX's out of the product and Bill Gates
    personally made the team slip the release date and put them back in.

    But, you are right. Visual Basic made Windows programming dramatically
    easier than was possible at the time.

    Robert Scoble

    ###



  10. #25
    Dave Keighan Guest

    Re: Do consumers even want web services?

    Hi Mark

    > VB1 was a _completely_ different way of doing Windows. I read
    > somewhere that when Bill Gates saw Alan Cooper's product he
    > said, "This advances the state of the art." MS bought it, named
    > it Visual Basic, and the rest is history -- including VBc, I
    > suppose. ;-)

    Moot I know, but it's from The Inmates Are Running The Asylum (page 57)
    Bill said: "How did you do that?". Ruby (the prototype Alan showed Bill)
    combined with QuickBasic became Visual Basic. Ruby was chucked as a
    prototype by Alan when he started working on the project (VB) with Russ
    Werner. Picked up a clearance copy of the book last month <vbg> - still
    reading it.

    --
    Dave Keighan

  11. #26
    Jonathan Allen Guest

    Re: Do consumers even want web services?

    > "a productivity gain by a factor of 2 or 3"
    > "50% less code"
    > "deploys 100% faster", etc.
    > Such claims are almost always false. And those that are true are
    > irrelevant when other factors are considered.


    Well, look at this way. In VB.Net, making a Web Service call is no more
    complicated than a regular function call. Also, there are virtually no
    deployment issues over a standard ASP.Net application. No other method I
    have seen offers me these advantages. Thus there are real gains for me.

    As for those specific numbers, I doubt their accuracy. Hard numbers are
    always suspect when dealing with coding in general.


    --
    Jonathan Allen


    "Michael D. Kersey" <mdkersey@hal-pc.org> wrote in message
    news:3C8AA183.EA01AEE6@hal-pc.org...
    > Jay Glynn wrote:
    > > It does very littel that can't be done now. The point is it does it much
    > > easier and with much less effort on the part pf the developer. <snipped>
    > > What .NET brings to the table is developer productivity. It has been
    > > reported by some that they see a productivity gain by a factor of 2 or

    3.
    > > That is inline with me experience.

    >
    > Every "silver bullet" software technology is accompanied by such claims,
    > e.g.
    > "a productivity gain by a factor of 2 or 3"
    > "50% less code"
    > "deploys 100% faster", etc.
    > Such claims are almost always false. And those that are true are
    > irrelevant when other factors are considered.
    >
    > But let's go throught the exercise anyway, since you claim to know
    > someone who really knows something about "productivity gains" using Web
    > Services and since you claim to have seen such gains yourself:
    > Who did the studies?
    > How did they do them?
    > Did they develop their product with separate teams in two ways:
    > a) using Web Services,
    > b) without Web services?
    > Did they then deploy both products and compare their performance?
    > Did they then total the costs of development and support using the two
    > methodologies (with and w/o Web Services)?
    > Did they maintain the apps over a period of years and keep records of
    > the total costs of ownership?
    > Finally, where are their published numbers, data and statistics to back
    > up the "increased productivity" claims?
    >
    > I believe that no one has done any of the above whatsoever and that any
    > productivity claims are BS.
    >
    > > In your thinking we would all still be coding assembler.

    >
    > Straw man argument: not my words.
    >
    > > .NET and web services provides a solution that is
    > > quick and easy to implement.

    >
    > Same old restatement of the Microsoft party line in the Microsoft party
    > style: "If you repeat it often enough, they will come."




  12. #27
    Jonathan Allen Guest

    Re: Do consumers even want web services?

    > And performs much much better.

    Not necessarily. With web services, all requests have to be converted to and
    from XML, which is slow to parse. Passing binary data would give you much
    better performance in the general case.

    --
    Jonathan Allen


    "Jay Glynn" <jlsglynn@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    news:3c89ff94$1@10.1.10.29...
    > And performs much much better.
    >
    > >
    > > 'Quick' and 'easy' are the key terms here. There is very little I can do

    > in
    > > ASP.Net that I couldn't do in ASP. However, it is much easier with

    > ASP.Net.
    >
    >
    >




  13. #28
    Robert Lantry Guest

    Re: Do consumers even want web services?


    "Michael D. Kersey" <mdkersey@hal-pc.org> wrote:
    <SNIP>
    >> and reduced the overall development time by several orders of
    >> magnitude.

    >
    >Do you realize that "an order of magnitude" generally means a factor of
    >10? So "several" is a factor of over 100? And this means that you're
    >claiming that you developed something in 1/100th the time it would have
    >been possible by other methods. Such claims are sheer hyperbole. And
    >further, how did you compute this reduction in effort? Did you try to do
    >the development several ways and then compare costs?
    >
    >Your words *do* support the contention that you are a numerical
    >illiterate, however.


    Have you actually written a Web-Service or written code that consumes one
    using Visual Studio.NET?

    While "Several Orders of Magnitude" might be hyperbole, the time savings
    is demonstrable. If you haven't tried it, I suggest you do. It is, quite
    simply, amazing. What's more, you can convert functional programming code
    to a web-service almost as easily as adding a <Webservice()> attribute in
    front of a function. Because of their nature in .NET, there is a cumulative
    savings when converting a business process to Web-Services because it's so
    **** easy.

    With that one tiny adjustment your code completely expresses it's calls and
    returns across HTTP in an XML datagram in a stateless condtion with no effort
    on your part. Consuming the web-service from code is equally simple.

    Web-Services are, simply, one of the most revolutionary tools ever created(at
    least in Visual-Studio). If you haven't taken the time to try using them,
    honest, try it and then poo-poo his assertions. Better yet, program the
    same fuctionality using the tool/language of your choice on the platform
    of your choice and compare the two.

    Web-Services for SQL Server promise to also provide a huge development savings.
    Basically, you can have SQL Server express stored procedures as Web-Services.
    To the .NET programmer, all he has to do is consume a service (proc) and
    it becomes instantly and transparently available to him in his code.


  14. #29
    Robert Lantry Guest

    Re: Do consumers even want web services?


    "Michael D. Kersey" <mdkersey@hal-pc.org> wrote:
    <Snip>
    >Same old restatement of the Microsoft party line in the Microsoft party
    >style: "If you repeat it often enough, they will come."


    If you're such a hard-sell on them, try web-services before condemning them
    to hype.

    People who have used them know exactly what they're talking about -- I have
    used them and I tell you, They're the coolest thing since sliced bread.

    Try it yourself and see.

  15. #30
    Mark Jerde Guest

    Re: Do consumers even want web services?

    Robert,

    > I know Alan Cooper and this is somewhat wrong.


    I stand better informed. I was aware of .VBX specifically, but
    I thought Ruby itself was more than you described.

    Mark Jerde
    Biometrics - www.idtechpartners.com



Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
HTML5 Development Center
 
 
FAQ
Latest Articles
Java
.NET
XML
Database
Enterprise
Questions? Contact us.
C++
Web Development
Wireless
Latest Tips
Open Source


   Development Centers

   -- Android Development Center
   -- Cloud Development Project Center
   -- HTML5 Development Center
   -- Windows Mobile Development Center