Feeds

How MS can hold onto the market while embracing XML

Stay ahead with the client, and being 'open' doesn't matter

  • alert
  • submit to reddit

Internet Security Threat Report 2014

The sight of Microsoft enthusiastically embracing open standards, really meaning it, and being believed as well is novel, but as far as XML is concerned, it's becoming less so. Microsoft really is driving XML, Paul Maritz really (probably) means it when he says Web services architectures should be open and standards-based, and the Microsoft strategy revealed so far seems remarkably short on proprietary catches. Mostly. The company's big bang announcement of its Windows DNA 2000 platform strategy did indeed outline a future where there would at least theoretically be room for all sorts of different platforms, but under the covers there are a few catches that make the open strategy not quite so open, and therefore more traditionally Microsoft, after all. Microsoft will be introducing native XML support across its entire product line, and will develop COM to provide full support for its Web services model, the result being that the architecture will be available to virtually any system using XML. This in itself is an intriguing one - Microsoft has been bashing the COM tub for years, but apparently, it was only kidding. The COM transport now becomes XML messages, rather than the default architecture of choice, and we can perhaps expect some development discontinuity as this hop is performed. Said Maritz: "What this means is that in the future, as we evolve COM, the native way that COM objects interact with each other will be through XML messages, over an HTTP transport. So the way that you send a message or invoke a method on an object transport will be to essentially formulate and XML message, have it flow as an Internet message, and be picked up by the object on the other end, which will then cause the code to be invoked. So we will make native use of Internet standards." The demonstrations themselves lacked any obvious catches. For example, Microsoft Outlook was shown using exposed 'back-end' XMLised data stores to create composite Web pages, i.e. a 'personal portal,' i.e. Gates' Digital Dashboard. It looked clean - it used Microsoft BizTalk Server, and it isn't exactly going to be easy to make an XML data store proprietary. More protestations from Maritz: "So by natively using XML as our format, we also believe we have a great interoperability story, and people don't actually have to buy into our whole programming infrastructure to interoperate us with them, or them with us. So we believe that this is a very open, Internet-friendly way of evolving." Novel, certainly. But with Gates still bashing on about the "great interoperability" between Microsoft products, you can see which way the wind's blowing. And here's the gag, possibly. Say that in a few years time all of the servers are serving composite Web pages in neutral XML, then everybody should be happy, and Microsoft will at last have demonstrated that it really is into open standards after all, right? But in that case, the client side software that can actually read the XML is what's important, and who currently dominates the client side? Who, for that matter, whipped up the Digital Dashboard concept a little while back? Digital Dashboard, you'll note, can in some senses be seen as what happens to the client when it starts tracking and organising personal portal type information, and maybe moves off the PC while it's about it. So you could start to detect a Microsoft cunning plan to maintain control via its core area of strength, the client, and if Microsoft holds on to this, it doesn't matter if standards are open, and everybody else can theoretically compete. Microsoft's bald-headed enthusiasm for XML meanwhile adds further spin to this, because the company can increase its chances of holding onto the client by keeping in the lead in terms of development. Cunning - and it may even be legal. ® Analysis - Inside AppCenter Windows becomes the Internet platform How pure is IE5's XML? The march away from COM

Top 5 reasons to deploy VMware with Tegile

More from The Register

next story
Facebook pays INFINITELY MORE UK corp tax than in 2012
Thanks for the £3k, Zuck. Doh! you're IN CREDIT. Guess not
Facebook, Apple: LADIES! Why not FREEZE your EGGS? It's on the company!
No biological clockwatching when you work in Silicon Valley
Happiness economics is bollocks. Oh, UK.gov just adopted it? Er ...
Opportunity doesn't knock; it costs us instead
Sysadmin with EBOLA? Gartner's issued advice to debug your biz
Start hoarding cleaning supplies, analyst firm says, and assume your team will scatter
YARR! Pirates walk the plank: DMCA magnets sink in Google results
Spaffing copyrighted stuff over the web? No search ranking for you
In the next four weeks, 100 people will decide the future of the web
While America tucks into Thanksgiving turkey, the world will be taking over the net
Microsoft EU warns: If you have ties to the US, Feds can get your data
European corps can't afford to get complacent while American Big Biz battles Uncle Sam
prev story

Whitepapers

Cloud and hybrid-cloud data protection for VMware
Learn how quick and easy it is to configure backups and perform restores for VMware environments.
A strategic approach to identity relationship management
ForgeRock commissioned Forrester to evaluate companies’ IAM practices and requirements when it comes to customer-facing scenarios versus employee-facing ones.
High Performance for All
While HPC is not new, it has traditionally been seen as a specialist area – is it now geared up to meet more mainstream requirements?
Three 1TB solid state scorchers up for grabs
Big SSDs can be expensive but think big and think free because you could be the lucky winner of one of three 1TB Samsung SSD 840 EVO drives that we’re giving away worth over £300 apiece.
Security for virtualized datacentres
Legacy security solutions are inefficient due to the architectural differences between physical and virtual environments.