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.

Technology Stocks : CheckFree Holdings Corp. (CKFR), the next Dell, Intel? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Paul Franceus who wrote (798)	12/20/1998 7:56:00 PM
From: Benny Baga	Respond to of 20297

>>>OFX is a problem for Checkfree in the sense that a bank that has an OFX server running can accept messages from anyone that is speaking OFX. Just my 2 cents. From what I understand the current OFX standard is not extensive enough to handle CheckFree's current EBPP product (CF uses extensions off of OFX) As long as CheckFree is leading the way in this new technology, standards will always be a step or two behind. I'm not worried about MS making OFX 2.0 a standard, because CheckFree could come out with OFX 3.0 tomorrow. The problem with Microsoft trying to design and own OFX 2.0 is that it will confuse the market place. Although, MSFDC...ooops, TransPoint has already done much of that. Benny(IMHO)

To: Paul Franceus who wrote (798)	12/20/1998 10:50:00 PM
From: g_m10	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 20297

Paul and Benny, Thanks for sharing your thoughts. My guess is that the "OFX 2.0" spec from Micro$oft probably follows their usual method of making something proprietary that is "close" to a standard, but not compatible with real standards. Inside MS they call this tactic "De-commoditize protocols & applications". Says recently leaked MS internal document (Infamous Halloween Document) : De-commoditize protocols & applications OSS projects have been able to gain a foothold in many server applications because of the wide utility of highly commoditized, simple protocols. By extending these protocols and developing new protocols, we can deny OSS projects entry into the market. opensource.org In that particular document OSS stands for Open Source Software, but OFX would perfectly fit in OFX's place. Well, they've failed with Java, they will fail with OFX.