DCOM Vs CORBA
Differences |
DCOM |
CORBA |
Focus |
Desktop first; enterprise second |
Enterprise first; desktop second |
Platforms |
Windows NT; support for Windows (all), Macintosh, UNIX, MVA |
MVS, UNIX, Windows (all), Macintosh |
Availability |
Single vendor; availability from other vendors expected |
Multi-vendor |
Service differences |
ActiveX-interactive content standard |
Significant number of additional services, including query, trader, transactions, as well as facilities in the areas of information management and system management. Lastly, services in areas such as finance, distributed simulation, and computer integrated manufacturing |
Maturity |
NT shipped in 1996; decade-long evolution of OLE and COM products; most services and facilities under construction |
Products since 1992; many services and facilities under construction |
Language Binding |
C, C++; working on JAVA, Visual Basic, Ada |
C++, Smalltalk, Ada95; JAVA and COBOL |
Interface Inheritance |
Supports aggregation but not inheritance; interfaces are not classes. |
Multiple Inheritance; interfaces are classes. |
Similarities between DCOM and CORBA
Similarities |
DCOM |
CORBA |
Object Model |
Yes |
Yes |
Standards body |
Recently made formal; managed by the Active Group, an Open Group affiliate |
Formal: managed by the Object Management Group |
Interface similarities |
Microsoft IDL allows for specification of interface and implementation and provides a repository for storage of interfaces. |
CORBA IDL allows for separation of interface and implementation and provides a repository for storage of interfaces. |
Language independence |
Yes |
Yes |
Compound document model |
Yes-OLE |
Yes-OpenDoc |
Location Transparency |
Yes |
Yes |