Re: Fwd: Re:[DotGNU]What IS .NET really

[modman]

I am sure that I speak for most people hear when I say that it is not our 
intention to deploy a system that locks people into this method of Minnie 
Hailstorms, However, incentive to deploy is an important aspect of this 
project, if no one was to deploy this system then no one could use it. I 
think that it may be best if we left the decision of where the data is kept 
up to the ISP, thatway, customers can decide who they want to use as their 
ISP based on how their data is stored. granted, Most ISPs will opt for the 
central Database and most people will jump on-board Willy nilly, but the 
decision was not ours so we can not take responsability for that.

Christian makes a valid and important point that we need to address, if we 
can not come up with a system that will give incentive for deployment then we 
are doing this project in vein.





movic wrote:

On July 13, 2001 04:59 pm, you wrote:

.NET consists of two parts:  component model and communication protocol.

There component model is based on COM.  The communication protocol is based
on SOAP.  .NET is what they sell in their Visual Studio.  This is part of
the money making as they will tie the .NET into their passport system.

.NET and the passport system is called Hailstorm.  Hailstorm can be
referred to mega services.  What Microsoft envision for Hailstorm is that
everyone will use a passport.  This passport system is very important for
them to create a two way revenue stream, like you see with Visa.


This is an extremely important point, and one that seems to be largely 
overlooked on this list. I'm going to argue against a Freenet-type solution 
for holding customer data, and describe what it will take to get dotGNU 
widely deployed.

To decentralise .NET, ISPs need financial incentive to deploy dotGNU. 
One of Microsoft's major revenue streams will come from the database built by 
Hailstorm -- essentially, the world's largest customer database, in an 
industry (e-commerce) for which little customer information is available. 
Therefore, it is in high demand. They will sell customer information to 
companies that pay for it, much like VISA does. Odious as it sounds, this is 
pretty much an accepted practise, and by and large people don't seem 
concerned enough to take privacy measures. So, the financial incentive for 
ISPs would be the large customer databases they build by acting as Microsoft 
plans to act. I believe dotGNU should be a decentralised .NET: each ISP will 
play the role that Microsoft plans to play, as a central arbriter of online 
transactions. If the ISPs have incentive to deploy dotGNU, Microsoft's 
monopoly is broken. I think of dotGNU as lots of little .NETs, spread out all 
over the place, with Microsoft replaced by an ISP at each installation.

Another bonus is large ISPs will be on our side. AOL, for instance, will like 
this idea very much. So will foreign ISPs and governments, who won't much 
like the idea of Microsoft building a database of their citizen's online 
commercial activity.

I know the idea of building an infrastructure that allows for the 
manipulation of customer data is unpleasant. But ISPs need incentive to 
deploy this thing, otherwise dotGNU is just work for them, with no payoff.

Thanks,
Christian
_______________________________________________
Developers mailing list
address@hidden
http://dotgnu.org/mailman/listinfo/developers