Does the design trade-off between applications and components compromise the Kona project in any way?
Corel has abandoned their original Java productivity applications based on fears about size and performance limitations. I think you can create useful components and applications at the same time. For instance, Internet Explorer can be viewed as just a bunch of components that were put together to make a browser, but Microsoft did a great job of integrating those components as well as exposing them individually for developers to use. Kona has been faced with the same challenge of coming up with smaller, reusable pieces that are useful when assembled, but that also have enough behavior as components to be useful on their own. I feel Kona will be ground-breaking in delivering applets that are actually valuable to the corporate world. These aren’t tic-tac-toe or “bouncing head” applets. The Kona people seem to have thought about this from the ground up, rather than viewing it as a port of 1-2-3, for instance. They are trying to make it small, in the best sense, by limiting functionality a
Related Questions
- Can design changes be added later in development, or even well after a project is completed? What do you provide as far as post-sale services, such as website maintenance?
- Does the design trade-off between applications and components compromise the Kona project in any way?
- Is there a preference for applications from U.S. consortia for the Egypt partnership project?
