OSNews

This doesn't makes sense, as Dbus is a natural evolution of lots of other stuff before it

There hasn't been lots of other stuff before DBUS at all.

Huh ? Why you can't do that ? Actually you can.

No you can't. You can get some basic communication going, but if you're passing objects, collections etc. then both apps need to know what they are. That's based on what framework you use, which DBUS doesn't specify.

That's not true at all. You could do that with most of other communication systems too. The truth is that DBus came at a time where several methods have been tested (ORBit, DCOP, ...)

They failed, and ORBit was a disaster for programmers. It never got beyond the bounds of the desktop.

This is another nonsense you're saying there. You sound like the shell commands and parsing is not good enough. News for you : you still will have to "send out shell commands and parse the 'stuff' that comes back". That is, if you do shell programming.

No, you're talking out of your backside. Parsing shell commands is not good enough - what a programmer wants is to use a function and get something definitive back. Of course that means creating an API, but DBUS has gone a long way to making it possible.

No, this is only needed on an easy home desktop. This won't get you anywhere on a server, that needs to be locked down.

Utter rubbish. Ever heard of WMI on Windows? Organisations use this stuff all the time.

Notice the context in which people talk about this : the average user's desktop.

I didn't mention the desktop. I just mentioned X.

This is even more nonsense. DBus is not a central API for programmers

I never said it was, but it has gone a long, long way to getting to one.

We would believe DBus is some magic by reading you. DBus is just a communication way between apps.

Considering just how utterly woeful communication between apps on Linux is and has been, it is magic in comparison.

It has nothing to do with Win32 API or Windows COM (you're comparing apples and oranges there), or even WMI.

Hmmmm, no. Functionally speaking you're talking about the beginnings of an equivalent, or something better.

I wonder what would be the benefit of DBus for administration !!

Administration applications would actually work in a universal way and you could actually have proper remote applications.

BS. This could never have been done 10 years ago, and sure enough should not have !

Errrr, yes it could.

That's why DBus is still unoptimised and really slow. It's slower than ORBit2/Bonobo !!

I doubt whether you'd see an appreciable difference, and you're fogetting one thing - no one uses Bonobo.