* Tim Smith peremptorily fired off this memo:
> In article <R8hyj.3666$dT.859@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
> Linonut <linonut@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> Thanks for the link. CORBA!
>
> The main reason CORBA sucks (from Wikipedia):
>
> The creation of the CORBA standard is also often cited for its
> process of design by committee. There was no process to arbitrate
> between conflicting proposals or to decide on the hierarchy of
> problems to tackle. Thus the standard was created by taking a union
> of the features in all proposals with no regard to their
> coherence.[3] This made the specification very complex,
> prohibitively expensive to implement entirely and often ambiguous.
Yet it is implemented in a GNU product.
> A design committee composed largely of vendors of the standard
> implementation, created a disincentive to make a comprehensive
> standard. This was because standards and interoperability increased
> competition and eased customers' movement between alternative
> implementations. This led to much political fighting within the
> committee, and frequent releases of revisions of the CORBA standard
> that were impossible to use without proprietary extensions.
You're getting to be as down-in-the-mouth as Hadron.
--
I laid out memory so the bottom 640K was general purpose RAM and the upper
384 I reserved for video and ROM, and things like that. That is why they
talk about the 640K limit. It is actually a limit, not of the software, in
any way, shape, or form, it is the limit of the microprocessor. That thing
generates addresses, 20-bits addresses, that only can address a megabyte of
memory. And, therefore, all the applications are tied to that limit. It was
ten times what we had before. But to my surprise, we ran out of that address
base for applications within... oh five or six years people were
complaining.
-- Bill Gates, Smithsonian Institution interview (1993)
|
|
