RE: [WEB400] Re: Modify the IE Browser

["Joe Pluta" <joepluta@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> From: Hans Boldt
> 
> This brings up another good point. Why are you trying so hard to fit
> your application into a browser interface, but then also work hard
> at getting around all the features of the browser? If you want your
> application to have complete control over the user interface,
> subverting the bookmark file, providing application specific help,
> etc., wouldn't a "fat client" client/server model be more
> appropriate? Or, here's a radical concept, wouldn't a 5250 terminal
> better suit that style of application?

Browsers solve a business problem.  We're looking for a ubiquitous,
Internet-capable interface.  The main "feature" of the browser important
to the business development world is that everyone has one and they all
speak a common language.

Fat clients have a host of deployment and synchronization issues.  5250
devices don't work over the Internet.

The browser is the best choice.  It's actually a very powerful interface
and has lots in common with the 5250, especially with a few simple
JavaScript routines thrown in.

There are still places for both fat clients (intranet power users with
heavy graphical or integration needs) and dumb tubes (systems consoles,
hostile environments), but for the concept of pervasive access to
applications, browsers are the best choice.

Joe