Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Microcap & Penny Stocks : Saflink Corp. (ESAF) Biometric Software Provider -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: brad greene who wrote (4041)	12/6/1998 1:55:00 PM
From: bob jordan	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 4676

Brad, First of all, I am not attacking anyone. Believe me, if I were attacking someone, they would know it. I do however like to joke around. Hope that doesn't get misinterpreted. On to the HAAPI thing. Why will HAAPI not be compatible with BioAPI? HAAPI is a high level API, and that is what the BioAPI has released this quarter. Also, consider that NRI is contributing to the standard. Is it not realistic to say that NRI's HAAPI is not possibly compatible with the new BioAPI standard? If I were NRI, and they were sending me evaluation copies of the API, I would be trying to alter my standard to be compatible. Again, the API is just a generic interface, it is not some complicated intricate programming. I found this: zdnet.com Then look at this: bioapi.org Also consider that BAAPI and HAAPI could be compatible: iosoftware.com So, I think that the BioAPI will not deviate that much from the already established standards from IO and NRI. For two reasons. First of all, both companies contribute to the BioAPI consortium. Secondly, I don't think either standard is that bad and needs to be altered significantly. But even if they do change it, is it not feasible that the current companies (NRI and IO) can change their API to match? Also, if you consider that Harris is compatible with both, then it is not a stretch to think that the current standards will not be compatible with the new standards, maybe with some revision, unless Harris doesn't want to have their product compatible with the BioAPI. Finally, your comparison to the VHS v. BETA standard is not that fair. Those standards were hardware in nature and can not be changed. Software standards, which we are talking about here, are not so bound. Unless they are so divergent as to require a major overhaul. But even then it can still be done. These are just my thoughts. I am hardly a technical expert, just someone trying to understand. Any and all comments would be appreciated. Also, I ask that you not predict the end for NRI. That may well happen, it may not, let's leave that for time to tell. I think you can understand that some on this board would get upset with "NIR is going to die" talk. In the meantime, I would be happy to discuss the current or future state of the API with you. Argue the facts with me that's fine, but conclusions are just opinions. So, as they probably will not agree, let's keep the opinions to ourselves, ok? Regards, Bob

To: brad greene who wrote (4041)	12/6/1998 2:22:00 PM
From: Sheldon C.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4676

Gee, I thought I was being kind to David. but enough of this. If you make it to Cabo, before the next Hurricane blows it to Alaska, and the NRIDers, don't make it to their dream spot, so be it. But, if NRI is such a failure, why are you bothering to post here. I think Bob is right, lets argue the facts about HA-API etc. The only problem is, that there are no Experts here who know enough to really argue the BAPI/BioAPI,HA-API question. And, in the end it may not be all that important, because they are supposed to make things easier, and if a technology is not compliant, it just means that the software engineers have to work a little harder. So, Brad and David, Enjoy your profits, You will make more money as a builder and a Lawyer than as a missionaries. Sheldon