For those who don’t get the title, it’s a play on an old commercial for a financial outfit that went something like “When EF Hutton talks, people listen.” Tim Bray’s post here triggered the connection for me. His version was “Adam Bosworth doesnt write very often. But when he does, you really want to read it,” and, well, you can probably see the connection. But the point here is that he’s right – when Adam talks, it’s usually because he has something to say, and it’s usually important. Not because of the logo on his business cards, incredible as it may seem, but because of the underlying theme that’s pushed him out of Microsoft and onto the path he’s on now. That is to say, the network.
As a quick aside, it shouldn’t really be a surprise to any of my readers that I’m in agreement with his piece – I’ve made similar arguments on other comments of his here and here. Aside from a slight underemphasis on his part on the importance of emerging mobile network options (from wi-fi to EV-DO), I couldn’t agree more with his overall take.
Anyway, the post in question is here, and it’s important enough that I felt it necessary to sit here in the office at 7:30 and post a response. Why’s it so important? Because Bosworth articulates strongly and clearly the intrinsic advantages that network based applications or services possess without going overboard.
It’s the latter bit that’s the most important, I think. The ability to argue persuasively in favor of services as an approach, while understanding that at times they’ll be a square peg for a round hole. As he puts it:
Is it right for everything to be a service? Certainly not. If you need offline access, if you’re manipulating rich media (photoshop), if you need to search those files customers choose to keep privately on their PC’s then client side code is required.
It’s that critical realization that is all too rare in technology these days. Different use cases call for different tools – but favoring one model (client) over another (services) to me is a pointless exercise. It seems obvious, but it still surprises me how often the “when all you have is a hammer, then everything looks like a nail” analogy holds true. Thin-clients and thick-clients have different strengths and weaknesses. That simple, 100% obvious truth somehow gets lost on vendors that are overly committed to one approach over another.
Personally I have a slight bias towards thin-clients (hey, what can I say? I’m a former SI), but I’m certainly not about to do all my word processing in the browser (still waiting on that enhanced blogging client, incidentally). Instead I use – as we all do, and will continue to – the tool that best fits the job at hand. And interestingly, we’re beginning to see a new category of tools emerge that blurs the client/service line; rich clients that leverage services on the back end (think FeedDemon/Bloglines for the consumer and Lotus Workplace for the enterprise), and thin-clients that extend their reach onto the client (think Firefox+extensions). How did these come about? Through a recognition that both hammers and screwdrivers have their place in any toolbox.
All that said, however, it’s pretty clear to me at this point that services are more important to the client than vice versa. And that fact is undoubtedly making a few vendors that we all know a bit uncomfortable. Bosworth’s employer, however, isn’t one of them.
No Comments