The proof is in the pudding

by Volker Weber

In a few weeks, you will have to revisit this article:

IBM Workplace Managed Client is also the first platform that lets developers write once and deploy on any operating system, including Microsoft Windows, RedHat Linux and (soon) Apple Macintosh — and have the application look and behave natively, wherever it's deployed. Fontaine calls it a "second generation" of Java client programming, made possible by its underpinnings in the open Eclipse application framework.

When IBM releases Sametime 7.5, it will be "too soon" for Apple Macintosh:

We wanted to provide advance notice we will not be shipping a production release of our Sametime 7.5 Connect client for Apple Macintosh. Our Sametime 7.5 Connect client capabilities and user experience on the Mac platform are not yet complete. We will continue to make our 7.5 Connect client available on Mac through our Expanded Beta program. This will enable you to exercise the software and provide us your feedback. We are committed to delivery our Sametime Connect client technology on the Mac platform. Our Expanded Beta program will continue to operate until our 7.5 Connect client is available on Mac in early-2007.

I think you will see this pattern again, when IBM starts a beta program for Notes 8. For now you can say: "Write once on Eclipse, run anywhere preferably on Windows". I believe that the Eclipse RCP is not mature on Macintosh yet.

Comments

IBM Workplace Managed Client is also the first platform that lets developers write once and deploy on any operating system, including Microsoft Windows, RedHat Linux and (soon) Apple Macintosh — and have the application look and behave natively, wherever it's deployed.

HTML isn't a platform?

David Richardson, 2006-08-05

No, it’s a mark-up language.

Ben Poole, 2006-08-05

OK Ben. An HTML browser that is Javascript-enabled isn't a platform?

David Richardson, 2006-08-05

Nope.

Sure, you can do some clever, nice-looking stuff, just with HTML. But where’s your session? Persistence? Business logic?

Things like TiddlyWiki show what you can do with a web page and a browser... but how does that mirror something like Workplace?

Ben Poole, 2006-08-05

A browser app also does not have native look and behavior.

Richard Schwartz, 2006-08-06

OpenOffice?

Carl Tyler, 2006-08-06

Why would you think the Eclipse RCP is less mature on the Mac? I suspect a considerable number of Eclipse contributors are using OS X laptops. It seems much more likely it is Lotus that is lacking not RCP. E.g. Mac installers vs .sit, the history of the legacy Notes client on the Mac (Java and not supporting latest O/S), even the upcoming "enhanced" Notes Mac client announced at LS2006 will not fix the Java. Again, that is not because Java does not run on OS X. When do you think Lotus will ship a client that is supported on Leopard/10.5? That delay will not be due to the lack of maturity on Leopard's part.

Look at the Linux client only being supported on the $$$ Linux. I am sure that was easier for Lotus Support; But I do not see how it addresses the customer desire especially from Asia/Brazil, etc. This seems like a symptom At some point, Lotus needs to decide whether they are a cross-platform company and if so then decide what that means for testing. (Or they could tell customers to only use Outlook as well as IE/.Net/Windows and get rid of all their testing issues and people.)


My guess is the Lotus cross-platform solution is to support any platform as long as it is Windows ( but not Vista) running any browser as long as its IE ( but not IE7) with an obsolete version of Java without JIT on a single monitor system without large-fonts enabled connecting to a non-DB2 datastore.

http://www.eclipse.org/community/rcp.php
http://www.eclipse.org/community/example_rcp_applications_v2.pdf

Woodall Hill, 2006-08-06

Thank you for the link to the applications pdf. Did you notice that it does not contain a single Mac screenshot?

Volker Weber, 2006-08-06

Volker - see page 10 - WiredReach. So it does contain a single Mac screenshot :)

Matt Buchanan, 2006-08-06

Ben, You hold that misconception at your long-term professional peril, just as IBM and Microsoft do.

For example, I suspect that half this site's readers are using Firefox. The Mozilla platform (which Firefox is built with) has offered access to local resources since Netscape ver 6. Not just through the filesystem, but the ability to use network prototcols other than HTTP (including one of your own invention). In fact, it offers everthing that the Notes platform does with the exception of integrated search and replication.

Sessions, business logic? Re-state case without using PTHB jargon, please. Javascript is more expressive than either Java or C#, if you're hung up on the language.

I gave up Notes when I switched to OS X 5 years ago. It became apparent at that time IBM couldn't or wouldn't support it fully. The Workplace saga is just an extension of this. IBM is swimming upstream here. The trend is away from monolithic development environments and the practice of charging for them. Good riddance.

David Richardson, 2006-08-06

David, thanks for the lesson. I’ll take it all on board, and look forward to the explosion of rich applications now that we have this new-fangled “mozilla” thing to use.

Ben Poole, 2006-08-06

@David,

Ben is right. Nobody is going to base any product on a feature found in a browser that only has 12% of the market. Also a browser which is still, to this day, incompatible with many websites (have a look at www.scandinavian.net as an extreme example).

The writing was on the wall for Notes on *X when the client in 4.5/4.6 had such incredible stability problems and such a tiny marketshare. IBM has come back to Unix variants with their push to Linux overall and their large contribution to the open source community. Unfortunately MAC is not Linux and has a small (although faithful) community. IBM already puts a high degree of development into MAC given the marketplace. Remembering that Notes/Domino is virtually a 100% business product and MAC is making its largest gains in the Home market.

One of the things I have been saying recently is "Yes you can, but do you really want to?" I have been saying this to the RCP and I say it to using HTML for something it was not designed for. Much like the Java OS or even the Java Office Suite from Corel (very interesting but completely useless).

It seems to me that we have created a fundamental disconnect somewhere down the line. To create the user experience that is needed, it is almost faster to create portable code and deploy it across all OS variants as native code. After all, since when did the user community particularly give a damn how hard it is for the vendor to produce the software they wish to use, especially if there is another vendor willing to paint a pretty picture without the pain (no matter how true or false). Even more so in the case of Notes/Domino where the databases work just fine thanks on every platform regardless of native code (caveats of using cross platform Notes development aside).

So in the case of Workplace and Hannover, I see a huge price in terms of performance to service the holy grail of "cross platform" gains. We are going to need those 64 bit multi core processors pretty badly if we are going to get real benefits out of what we are offered.

So again "Yes you can, but do you really want to?"

Neil Thomas, 2006-08-06

"Also a browser which is still, to this day, incompatible with many websites (have a look at www.scandinavian.net as an extreme example)."

What, exactly, makes Firefox incompatible with scandinavian.net? All I see is that they are doing server-side browser detection and excluding the function calls (and functions) for the onchange events on those select fields.

I've never had any problems making similar functionality work for both Firefox and IE. Perhaps they need some technical consultation on web development? Or, perhaps, they are a "Microsoft shop"? Who is to say?

Philip Martin, 2006-08-07

Hmm, so the money spent on Microsoft Live, Google, Yahoo, and even Workplace is because they just aren't as wise as Notes developers???

Perhaps web apps are a disruptive technology.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disruptive_technology
Or perhaps not, hype is all too common.

But the fact that the users of the entrenched technology prefer it and find it superior is always the case; But whether it is Toyota vs GM, mainframe vs mini, mini vs PCs, or dinosaurs vs mammals, sometimes the disrutive does catch up.

So the fact that thick client apps are clearly superior to the web apps today is not a proof that it will always be the case.

Woodall Hill, 2006-08-07

So the fact that thick client apps are clearly superior to the web apps today is not a proof that it will always be the case.

I don’t disagree with you. But I don’t understand why some people in this thread are getting on their high horse about some kind of mythical Notes developer who refuses to let go of the Notes client and won’t countenance any development that isn’t in Notes formula / Lotusscript / whatever.

I started out as a Notes developer. But before that I was coding HTML. In fact, my first web site was in 1994. Indeed, now, I couldn’t tell you the last time I coded a Notes application at work: it’s all web stuff now. But that doesn’t mean there isn’t a place for proper, installed, clients too (oh. the professional peril!)

Now, let’s set aside the client issue, and consider HTTP itself. It’s not exactly an ideal protocol to work with when it comes to complex application development. I could go into more detail about “state” and so forth, but apparently that’s too much jargon for some (which leads me to wonder why they’re bringing this debate up in the first place).

Anyway, I digress. Yes, IBM are prioritising Windoze / Linux over OS X. As a big Mac fan, I find this disappointing. But I am also not surprised:

(a) they have always done this;
(b) their argument would no doubt centre around market share in their target audience, i.e. the enterprise.

Ben Poole, 2006-08-07

David said:
The Mozilla platform (which Firefox is built with) has offered access to local resources since Netscape ver 6.

Ben replied:
Nobody is going to base any product on a feature found in a browser that only has 12% of the market.

IMHO David was not talking about using a browser but using the Mozilla Framework while Ben replied to using Firefox, which seems to be a difference.

Marc Petermax, 2006-08-07

Marc, I know what David was referring-to, yep. Don't get me wrong, I think the Mozilla stuff is pretty cool -- but your attribution is wrong: the response you quote was from Neil Thomas, not from me.

Ben Poole, 2006-08-07

@ben b)

Perhaps, although I would be a bit surprised if the Linux RHEL 4 workstation ( as opposed to all Linux ) marketshare is greater than the Mac now (outside of IBM.)

Woodall Hill, 2006-08-08

Old vowe.net archive pages

I explain difficult concepts in simple ways. For free, and for money. Clue procurement and bullshit detection.

vowe

Paypal vowe