IBM is introducing a new device for secure Internet computing.
The IBM Zone Trusted Information Channel (ZTIC) (pronounced "stick") is a memory-stick sized device that plugs into a USB port on a PC and establishes a direct, secured connection with a Web site's server. This connection bypasses any malware on the PC that might intercept the transaction. The initial application is on-line banking, but I can imagine it being useful for lots of on-line transactions that need to be performed securely.
Here's a demonstration and explanation from IBM on YouTube:
Search Google for images of WebSphere and what do you find?
My colleague Matt Rollo points out: If you search for "WebSphere" in Google image search, besides the usual pictures of IBM marketing materials and screen shots, picture #43 (or so) is a person. A familiar looking person. In fact, it's my picture. So, like Matt says, you can call me "Mr. WebSphere."
So far, XMS is just an IBM thing. However, I think IBM hopes that other vendors will adopt it for their messaging products. Then customers will be able to develop code that is more product- and vendor-independent.
The WebSphere MQ API (called MQI) also supports C/C++ and C#/.NET clients (as well as a slew of other languages). But XMS has some advantages: The pub/sub support in XMS is better, because you have methods to subscribe and unsubscribe, whereas with MQI you have to send those requests as messages. Meanwhile, Message Broker and Default Messaging don't really support C/C++ and C#/.NET at all, but now they do via XMS, and in a way such that the client doesn't really care which provider it's using.
So if you're using C++ or .NET and want to use the IBM messaging products, check out XMS, it'll make your job easier. [Read More]
Part of what's cool about Google Suggest is not just what it does, but how it's implemented. It has a dropdown list that updates as you type, without reloading the web page. How do they do that? Joel points to the answer: XmlHttpRequest from Apple (doesn't it figure somehow? Apple is still the innovator of so much cool stuff!), as explained in Auto complete comes of age. As usual, Slashdot has been on this for two months now, complete with an explanation of the Implementation details.
Can WSDL be used to describe RESTful Web services?
An on-going area of interest has been REST vs. SOAP/WSDL, such as Web Services: REST vs. SOAP/WSDL. In general, REST and SOAP/WSDL have been seen as two very different approaches where you had to choose one or the other because never the tween shall meet.
Now I've stumbled upon "Describe REST Web services with WSDL 2.0" (developerWorks), which explains that "Until recently there was no formal language to describe REpresentational State Transfer (REST) Web services-now there's WSDL 2.0." It's by Lawrence Mandel, who works in IBM Rational and leads the Apache Woden project (which is developing a WSDL 2.0 parser). Looks like WSDL 2.0 is becoming an alternative or replacement for WADL.
Support for WSAD 5.1 will be withdrawn on September 30, 2006.
This is shown on the W page for the IBM Software Support Lifecycle. It also shows that support for WSAD 5.0 ended on April 30, 2006.
Withdraw from support
WebSphere Studio Application Developer for Linux and Windows, V5.0
10 Jan 2003
30 Apr 2006
WebSphere Studio Application Developer for Linux and Windows, V5.1
29 Aug 2003
30 Sep 2006
So, if you're still using WSAD 5.x, what should you do? Upgrade to RAD 6.0. RAD is the next release of WSAD. It can be used to develop apps for WAS 5.0 and 5.1--just like WSAD--as well as for WAS 6.0, and has newer features than WSAD.
I was wondering if Tuscany is part of the implmentation of the SCA features in websphere process server 6.1. And if so, whicht version of the spec (1.0?) and tuscany implementation (1.01?) will be used.
Since the SOA Feature Pack is still Beta and WPS 6.1 is final, WPS 6.1 does not incorporate the SOA Feature Pack (but does incorporate WAS 6.1). The plan is still to have a release of WPS that will incorporate the SOA Feature Pack and therefore Tuscany and therefore a standardized impl of SCA and SDO, but this is all taking longer than planned and therefore is not part of WPS 6.1. Therefore WPS 6.1 contains the same proprietary impl of SCA and SDO in WPS 6.0.x, which will make backwards compatibility and therefore migration of your existing code easier.
It's not what you say, it's how you say it. Well actually it's both.
In Words Don't Mean What They Mean, I discuss an article on a new book explaing that a sentence has two purposes: to convey meaning and also to negotiate a relationship with the listener. That's why the way we word things often makes no literal sense, and literal wording often seems overly frank and rude. Interesting stuff.
The question has been how to set up WAS so that its apps can use both an SIBus and a set of WMQ queues (what we're now calling a WMQ network) without needing to know which queues where in which provider. No doubt, WAS could have two providers--an SIBus and a WMQ network--and apps could access queues in both. But ideally WAS apps should just use the SIBus and non-WAS apps should just use the WMQ network, and the bus and network should be grafted together somehow.
As of WAS 6, the grafting was accomplished using MQ Link. The two bus and network were still separate, but bridged via MQ link.
Now there is another option: Make a WMQ queue manager a member of an SIBus, essentially making the queue manager act like a messaging engine. Then, for the applications running in a WAS cluster that is a member of the bus, the queues in the queue manager act like queues in any other messaging engine--that is, they act like any other queues in the bus. While the SIBus in the WAS cluster and the WMQ queue manager are still separate, they're tied together as a single bus. This is a feature that was available in WAS 6, but only with WMQ 6 on z/OS. Now, with WAS 7 and WMQ 7 distributed (or WMQ 6 or later for z/OS), it works on all platforms.
So, what is (currently) the latest version of RAD anyway?
In RAD 6.1?, I established that there is no RAD 6.1 to go with WAS 6.1 (but there will be a RAD 7.0 in late 2006). I also said "The latest version of RAD is 22.214.171.124," since that's what the page said it was. That didn't sound correct to me, and sure enough, JW@IBM commented very quickly that "actually the latest version of RAD is 126.96.36.199." She's correct; I wonder why the RAD page is out of date?!
She went on to ask: "Do you know of the best way to stay on top of the latest fixpack as it's released?" Good question. WAS has a couple of good pages documenting this info; see Keeping WAS Up-To-Date. In Keeping RAD Up-To-Date, I documented the IBM Rational Product Updater that JW refers to. But shouldn't there be a support page listing definitively what the latest version of RAD is?
I'd say there should be, but apparently there isn't.* What I have found along these lines is listed on the RAD support page. (Go to the main RAD page, then select Support.) On the support page, the Download section lists a couple of interesting items:
So whereas WAS has a whole set of pages listing the patches for different versions, RAD just seems to have its main Support page. Anyway, it provides the definitive answer: Currently, the latest version of RAD is 188.8.131.52 interim fix 2.
BTW, the support page has an RSS feed. The announcement of RAD 184.108.40.206 fix 2 is currently forth from the top. So this RSS feed would be one way to find out about the latest patches.
Also BTW, I now see that the support page also has another link I've been looking for: In the Learn section is Information center, a link to the RAD InfoCenter I documented in Rational Developer Tools Information Centers. I haven't been able to find many links to the RAD info center, so I'm glad to see this one.
** 06/19/2006 Update: I said I didn't know how to find the Recommended Fixes page. Another Rational colleague of mine pointed out that they now list it on the RAD Support page in the Download section (just like for WAS). So if you loose the link for it, that's where to do find it. Good deal.[Read More]
I remember when Ward was discussing starting the Wiki and the Portland Pattern Repository and was looking for contributions and participation. The PPR was a place to post pattern documents as traditional, non-editable web pages. The Wiki was an inclusive, unmoderated, yet structured place to discuss the patterns. Anyone could participate and, unlike a forum or mailing list, keep like thoughts grouped together and even make fixes and additions to each other's material. As a discussion evolved, we'd redistribute the content across new Wiki pages much like the way we'd refactor the object-oriented code most of us wrote. The discussion wondered off into all kinds of side topics that we "patterns people" and "OO people" found interesting. This is when we knew we were on to something (and just confirmed what Ward suspected all along).
This was in the mid-1990's, back in the days when the Web was new and you could get domain names that were two or three letters long, and that was important because your users had to be able to remember your domain name and type it in easily. (Now every lousy Hollywood movie and lame grocery store product seems to get its own domain name. What happened to them representing companies, not products?!) He carefully wrote "http://c2.com" on the board so that we'd be able to find his web site. ("Type it in just like this. It'll work.") It's a trip to see how this all started, then to see it featured so prominently in articles in Time and the WSJ. Pretty cool. [Read More]