COM,COM+, .NET

[ShutitFuel]

Could anyone explain the difference between these three technologies, especially involving their impact on a target machine (in the registry, etc)?

 

[DimPrawn]

Com+ is Com running on Windows 2000 or XP or 2003 server.

Com+ makes use of the registry to hold configuration and is not firewall friendly in inter-machine comms.

.Net stores it's config in XML files and can communicate via httpon port 80 (e.g. SOAP).

Registering Com+ applications requires changes to the registry.

Deploying .Net applications requires simply xcopying the files and folders, unless centralised .net assemblies are used, in which case they are deployed to the Global Assembly Cache, which is a special directory on the machine.

Hope this rambling helps.

 

[ShutitFuel]

x

x

Thanks DimPrawn.

Do you know if there are of any examples of extra functionality in com+ as opposed to com?

For instance, I believe COM+ allows better isolation?

Why do we need the COM+ explorer ( under admin tools). Does anyone have a practical explain of using this to achieve a typical task?

Regarding XCOPY this isn't really recommended is it? We would have no COM interop, no self-repair, rollback, etc. Is this correct?

If anyone else wants to add anyting please feel free.

 

[Paul Paranoia]

Re: x

Re: x

> Com+ makes use of the registry to hold configuration and is not firewall friendly in inter-machine comms.

> .Net stores it's config in XML files and can communicate via httponport 80 (e.g. SOAP).


You can use SOAP to communicate over httpwith COM+ too.

 

[DimPrawn]

Re: x

Re: x

Yes, but COM+ Soap services requires COM+ 1.5 which means

"COM+ 1.5 is included in Microsoft® Windows® XP and in Microsoft Windows Server 2003. The new COM+ 1.5 features are not available in earlier platforms, such as Microsoft Windows 2000."

So bear that in mind.