[omniORB] omniORB compared to TAO

[Jian Deng]

> > omniORB is a good implementation of the features it has. TAO has many
> > more features, is supported on more platforms and compilers, has the
> > ACE infrastructure to help with porting to new platforms, and has a
> > more active development community. I think that both products have a
> > good long term outlook. I use omniORB for the python mapping and TAO
> > for all
> > C++ code, at least partly for historical reasons, partly for
> > portability, and partly for (currently unused) extra features.
>
> OK, what about MICO? Does anyone have experience with MICO and C++?

mico is yet another strong contender in open source orb implementation.  it is 
esay to use and very dependable.

- jd