Open Communications
Made up of two subsidiary groups, OpenX and the Open Software Foundation (OSF), the Open Group is best known for its Distributed Computing Environment (DCE), a way for software modules running on different systems to communicate. According to Microsoft, the Open Group's DCE architecture provides a solid background for its new role. In its new role, the Open Group will oversee the component object model (COM) and distributed component object model (DCOM), which make up the pulse of the Internet Explorer, Win NT, and Win 95.
Also included is the Microsoft remote procedure call (MS-RPC), the standard security provider interface (SSPI), the COM Registry (monikers, or names, that allow components to locate each other), and Automation, which allows objects to work with high-level programming languages.
Beyond NT Development.
Viewed through the lazy eye of the development community, Microsoft's decision to knight the Open Group and its putative sibling is unquestionably a step in the right direction. The release of the ActiveX core technologies w:il1 provide developers with the tools to freely develop client/server applications for platforms other than NT - a big plus in easing and encouraging the creation of cross-platform, multi-tier applications. The initiative will also be attractive to companies not interested in writing so-called "plumbing" code required for application distribution over the Internet. Also, some vendors have found themselves in murky waters in the past when Microsoft unexpectedly altered key specifications for the
above technologies. Vendors can now feel more secure about their product's technical longevity. The move also enables ActiveX component developers to protect their secrets. The initial. idea that vendors would have to send Microsoft their software for testing to ensure operability among browsers and other component developers understandably left most software companies feeling naked.
Hidden Agendas
By releasing its core technologies, Microsoft is also trying to make its camp accessible to developers who currently favor other technologies. Developers using the Object Management Group's (OMG) common object request broker (Corba) technology and its Web extension, the Internet Inter-ORB Protocol (IIOP), are high on Bill's list. The reason is that CORBA and IIOP compete directly with COM and DCOM.
Because Netscape has adopted CORBA and because over 40 million browsers are now populating consumers' desktops, the OMG and its specifications are now posing a serious threat to Microsoft's hegemony. Other adopters of the OMG'S CORBA are major developers such as Hewlett-Packard, IBM, and Sun Microsystems. The result is that developers are forced to choose between one set of specifications or another, seriously fragmenting the Internet.
Microsoft's decision to release its ActiveX technologies may also be an attempt to take some of the bounce out of OpenDoc's stride. Another standard from the OMG and its Component Integration Laboratories affiliate, OpenDoc has been recently implemented for IBM's OS/2 and Apple's Mac OS. Also, both Sun and Apple are planing to create an integrated line of products for the Inter/Intranet using OpenDoc and Java. OpenDoc has the promises of being a technically viable platform independent standard. Its greatest drawback is that it is only just finding its way into the consumer marketplace. When IBM finally ships its Windows version, Redmond is certain to feel more heat.Jilting Java
A more serious threat to Microsoft's market share is Sun's Java programming language. Written with the Internet and platform independence in mind, the reality is that Java is already cross-platform. SunSoft's "write once, run anywhere" credo means that developers need only recompile to change platforms. But, with the release of its core technologies, Microsoft may be encouraging developers to write proprietary extensions to the ActiveX API (application programming interface), locking Java into the Windows platform. SunSoft understandably fears that it is going to lose its platform independence as a result of Microsoft's fancy footwork
But Microsoft may not be dancing entirely dirty. While it may be time that Java is already a platform independent language, it is hardly an established business model Microsoft's ActiveX and its associated core technologies, on the other hand, are. By opening up, Microsoft may bring Java from its current status as a compelling new technology to a viable business model. The implied result is that Java becomes a Redmond water fish.
Freedom From Extensions
SunSoft has little intention of swimming with Microsoft's school. It is hoping that its release of Java Beans, reusable components that hook together and run inside a number of different platforms, will free developers from Microsoft's proprietary extensions. Java Beans will run inside Java applets, Netscape browsers, OpenDoc containers such as ClarisWorks, and OLE f ActiveX containers such as Microsoft Word and Internet Explorer. If developers move to Java Beans, SunSoft is hoping that Redmond will be forced to support its Java Virtual Machine and embed it in Windows.
Nevertheless, the openness of the Open Group stops at the server. Microsoft and the Open Group are not providing all the tools for true open standards application development. The release of the Core Technologies does not include the code for the Win32 (API) or the OLE data access API. If Microsoft was to give this information away, it may lose control of certain features on the Windows desktop that currently give it a competitive advantage. Understandably, Microsoft has expressed little intention of ceding control of its home turf.
Analysis: Pure Marketing Initiative
It is hard to believe that Microsoft would open up its core technologies to promote platforms other than Windows. It's more likely that the Open Group initiative is a well-groomed marketing effort to outdo competing technologies such as Java, OpenDoc, and CORBA. By offering its core technologies, Redmond is capturing developer attention in addition to promoting openness. The idea here may not be freedom of specifications, but the specification of freedoms. We wonder how long those freedoms will last.
Even though this current version of its core technologies has been released to the development community, this action does not ensure that future versions will. Microsoft has recently registered the domain name Active-X2-DOM, indicating that it already has another version in the works. This move would be very similar to what the software giant did with OLE.
A less likely, though possible, result of the Open Group initiative would be some interaction between competing standards committees. While deep technical differences divide the DOM and CORBA camps, Microsoft's recent adoption of the Open Group offers some promise. Both the Object Management Group and the Open Group have had branding relationships in the past, the Open Group has been testing aspects of CORBA through one of their sub-groups called X/Open. As a result, both standards committees would be well positioned to engage in discussions about standardizing the competing technologies that they represent.
