ToySoldier, in your post to TreeTop, you wrote:
>If IBM isnt in the game to EVOLVE their customers and the industry
>to Java / CORBA, then they wont be successful.
IBM is in that game, via the project I'm working on, the
San Francisco Project. Please examine the web site for this
project, look at the statements from various independent
consultants, comments from CEO's of various software companies
we are teaming-up with, etc. "San Francisco" was the internal
code name (S = Sharable, F = Frameworks) and it kind of 'stuck'...
ibm.com
Also, read the following 3 links (accessible from the link above):
from DBMS magazine: "IBM: More Than a Hill o' Beans - Directing
the future of e-business, the San Francisco Project, and ... Java?"
dbmsmag.com
which says, in part:
"But IBM as a hardware supplier has also worked
extensively in making these various Web-oriented programs operate
across its platforms. While this in itself was not
surprising (IBM's motherlode has always been legacy systems), I
was surprised at how far IBM had already gone in
implementing Java as the common language. I was also surprised by
some of the initiatives IBM had taken on its own to
enhance the effectiveness of the Java language, in particular
with its San Francisco project.
...
"Reusable application frameworks are exactly what IBM's San Francisco project is all about. Developers build
applications by modifying and extending the default business
objects and logic of the framework rather than starting an
application from the raw requirements and application analysis. A
specific example is the Purchase Order Management
framework that contains code, logic, and default properties for
managing sales orders, quotes, and supply contracts
throughout their life cycles.
Perhaps a question has popped into your head about the name,
"San Francisco project." What is this, a product or
product line? Why "project"? It's a project because it's a
collaborative effort. The impetus for the application frameworks
came from some of IBM's software partners, primarily application
builders in and around large corporations. They wanted to
leverage object-oriented technology but were hindered by the
high cost of developing components, the need to retrain
programmers, and the potential risks of investing in a new
technology."
...
"I believe that IBM, not Sun, is the barometer for the success of
Java. IBM has wagered that Java will be the common language that
binds and integrates its many pieces. This role is even more
important than Cobol, which was the soul of IBM
applications, but not the heart of its systems operation.
Java has the potential to be both. Java must succeed because
there is so much at stake for IBM (and by extension, Lotus).
If Sun can't do it, then IBM will pick up the reins."
"IBM San Francisco Project Growing in Importance at IBM"
news400.com
from TechWeb: "IBM: I Left My Java In San Francisco"
techweb.com
which says, in part:
"San Francisco is in its second release now, version 1.2, and
checks in at a formidable 500,000 lines of code. It is
structured to provide core Java building blocks, encapsulating
business process logic for applications including general
ledger, warehouse management, order management, and
accounts receivable/accounts payable."
and
"IBM now has more than 360 ISV licensees of San Francisco
and said it expects to have roughly 100 products shipping by
year's end based on San Francisco code." |
