Talk:Microsoft RPC

yep. i'm definitely biased :) i'm annoyed, because ms implemented a _great_ system in nt domains and they then messed up part of the details, and because ms have such a bad reputation people believe that the baby should be thrown out with the bathwater.  i'm annoyed at the free software community or more specifically its sponsors for doing e.g. stupid things like creating "dbus" which has taken what five man-years to develop, at the expense of IGNORING freedce and fixing the threading and not adding a plugin transport that would then make dbus look like the toy that it is.

so yes i'm thoroughly biased but i've been researching this area for over seven years finding out different computing technologies, information on them etc. it's very very convoluted and complex, as one might expect the history of inter-related projects spanning quite literally man-centuries to be.

anyway, the info i first dropped in here is a place-holder to get my head round a few other issues, cleaning up the netbios stuff, the netbeui stuff, smb, cifs, msrpc, dcerpc, dcethreads, dce, nt domains, the whole 9 yards _and_ its dog, as people tend to go "hi i want a windows please" and then think it's just one protocol... well it ain't!!


 * I remember reading up into DCE several years ago, I found a lot of accusations on the web that Microsoft "hijacked" a of code from DCE/RPC in "MSRPC"

MSRPC is derived from the DCE 1.1 reference implementation, but has been copyrighted by Microsoft. None of the UNIX vendors at the time wanted to implement DCE/RPC it at the time.

Later on, DCOM would be 'donated' by MicroSoft to the Open Group as a marketing stunt. The "D" to COM was due to extensive use of DCE/RPC – more specifically Microsoft's "enhanced" version, MSRPC. However, DCOM is pretty worthless without a bunch of application-level class libraries, such as ODBC, OLE DB, ADO, and ASP to run on top of it. Microsoft never released these specifications to the public, so these technologies have never been available for Unix. Ugly bit of history that no one seem to have commented upon in Wikipedia Cuvtixo 19:00, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

The size of OpenGroup DCE is arguable. I have recently downloaded dce122 with crypto libraries included. It has 105 tar.gz files inside, and all the files take up just 88.6 Mb, which is two times less than stated in the article. 91.202.71.251 (talk) 21:01, 25 April 2009 (UTC)