"So the SOAP "stack" is a mess...

[john_oshea@wordbank.com]

David Cantrell wrote:
> john_oshea at wordbank.com wrote:
>> As a matter of interest[*], is anyone seeing any sign of "improvements"
>> here? Is anyone using WCF to auto-generate, auto-deploy, auto-*anything*
>> Web-Service-y? That's actually *useful*, that is?
> 
> No, and I can say that confidently without even looking, because there
> are only three types of people who choose Microsoft "technology".  They
> are those who are stupid, those who are ignorant, and those who are
> malicious.

There's that interesting subset, though, of those who have pots of
money. Money which we'd be more than happy to relieve them of. Assuming,
this is, we can find that lovely middle ground whereby service X has
sufficient managerial appeal but also doesn't send the respective sets
of techies who have to actually *do* the work completely off the deep end.


> Of course, "web services" aren't useful anyway.  They're a crappy way of
> shoe-horning everything into the lowest common denominator network
> service instead of actually writing proper applications.

Well, yes. But people are lazy. And we want to make things as easy as
possible for said lazy people who will then think we're wonderful and
shower us with respect, praise and ideally those pots of money again.
Nothing if not shallow, me  ;-)

That said, despite various writings on tha intarweb about how whizzy WCF
will make web services for said lazy people, I can't actually find much
evidence of people actually doing anything of the sort, at least in a
'general public facing' way. Lazy buggers...


-- 
John O'Shea
Wordbank Limited
33 Charlotte Street, London W1T 1RR
Direct line: +44 (0) 20 7903 8829
Fax: +44 (0) 20 7903 8888
<http://www.wordbank.com/>