Steve Millet - What is Indigo? | TheChannel9Team

RL

Could it be, that he's using the new Consolas font? I know, a little bit off-topic...

Dean_186
Future is Clear.... Microsoft

Indigo is something ive allways wonderid about ive heard it mentioned many times but never figured it our. If its for web could this be the end of ASP.NET Development. or is this just another language like (HTML and XML) any way good job team keep it up.

rhm

So Indigo isn't the future of all communication on Windows or even on .NET. It seems mostly focussed on web services even though it does have binary transports and named pipe support.

It may be the case that when references are passed over a remote transport that keeping track of objects and their lifetimes is "difficult", but DCOM did it, Corba does it and .NET remoting does it. To promote the Indigo version of events you are going to need a better story than "it's difficult". Since Indigo doesn't do some things that Remoting does then it isn't a complete replacement, which is fair enough as they never said it was, but we need to be clear that the ".NET remoting isn't going away" is not just because we need to support existing code, i.e. there is still a point to using remoting.

Mollyfud
Progress: Greatest RDBM on 3rd Rock from the Sun

How does Indigo relate to JMS/ESB? It sounds that they would be competing yet things that should work together.

Any comments on that?
Molly

Ovidiu.Platon

There seems to be a lot of confusion surrounding Indigo. I would also recommend reading the article Introducing Indigo: An Early Look

Ovidiu

Steve411

The way every single video begins is by you asking; "Who are you?", I love that!
Keep it up guys! great video

dudenumber4
Corporate Cog

In the interview, Steve mentions that it's basic to loosely coupled services that object references not be passed around.
I am developing a web service that takes as it's only input param an object (just a structure, really). That way I can add new parameters to the service by adding properties to that object w/o breaking existing clients.

Am I violating this loosely coupled rule?

grennis

dudenumber4 wrote:
In the interview, Steve mentions that it's basic to loosely coupled services that object references not be passed around.
I am developing a web service that takes as it's only input param an object (just a structure, really). That way I can add new parameters to the service by adding properties to that object w/o breaking existing clients.

Am I violating this loosely coupled rule?

I think it is OK, as long as when you add new members to the structure, it still has meaning if older clients are not supplying those values. So if you add a string member, the older client will essentially be passing null for that value (since it is not present) and you have to expect and handle that gracefully.

dudenumber4
Corporate Cog

Yes, of course; new members would have good defaults, but this is still an object reference. I'm just wondering if this is the type of coupling that Steve is advocating against.