EBAS vs. FLNK vs. INIT : Why no MSFT, Strategy.
Taken from RB: JWtechy 11/12/1999
I don't typically post here, but was intrigued by the technical debate raised by the referenced post. Let me see if I can shed a little light.
The named ASP companies, EbaseOne, FutureLink, and Inerliant, represent 3 different strategies or camps, if you will, from an ASP architectural perspective. Microsoft, as a Windows centric platform company aligns most closely with FutureLink, IBM with Interliant,
and Sun Microsystems with EBAS.
Case of FLNK:
Its basic approach to application hosting is to centralize host windows application, and using Citrix technology, support client access in what I'll call "terminal mode". What this means is the application runs on the central server and Citrix code running on the
server captures keystrokes and ships them to Citrix code running on the client, where the individual keystrokes are displayed. This is the "mainframe model". Heavy server, dumb terminal like clients.
Advantages: It gets you the widest available set of applications, Windows applications.
Disadvantages: You can only support Microsoft Applications. You are locked into Citrix middleware. You have little choice in the mission critical domain, because Microsoft apps are not and won't be for the foreseeable future, industrial strength. So you can run light weight
apps, mail, backoffice, and other buggy MS code, but you won't run any industrial strength UNIX apps here.
Case of INIT:
Interliant takes a step up the food chain with its Lotus Notes based hosting strategy. Using Lotus technology called Domino Instant Host.
Advantages: It is no longer tied to a MS platform, applications are more robust, and reliable. The cost of ownership or operation in this case, is comparatively cheaper because you are dealing with a homogeneous environment (its all Lotus based apps).
Disadvantages: Its all Lotus based Apps! So they are few, with a dwindling supply of new applications. Lotus and particularly Domino, does not scale well as it was created for heavy duty client server environment. This new flavor of Lotus must contort in ways that are "limiting" to accommodate the new web enabled paradigm.
Case of EBAS:
EBAS takes a more leading edged approached, with Sun like thin client focus, while hedging its bets with the potential to support heavy duty client server style applications as well. It can support UNIX or Windows applications. But is most suited for the new wave of pure web,
object based applications that utilize Java applications servers and ORB technology. TheClient server model would typically create an increased cost of operation issue because of the software that must be managed on the clients machine. This is where EBAS cleverly leverages Marimba technology to make software distribution/management effortless and automated. Thanks to Castanet, the same technology used by IBM's Tivoli management suite, EBAS is able to serve a wider source of hosted applications.
Advantages: diverse application set, leverages the premier enterprise platform (Sun's Solaris), can cater to higher quality demands of larger corporations as well as small to medium business because of the enterprise strength features(UNIX plus High Availability platforms). Is best suited for the new wave of web based applications, utilizing java, javascript, JSP, JMS, and XML. Has the most extensive quality guarantees, end to end, with broadband communications infrastructure leverage to boot.
Disadvantages: I'm working on these...still sifting through the corporate trash, looking for clues.
I hope this was helpful.
An ASP professional,
jw |
