[omniORB] omniORB compared to TAO

[Karel Gardas]

On Wed, 5 Mar 2003, James Michael DuPont wrote:

>
> --- Thomas Lockhart <lockhart@fourpalms.org> wrote:
> > 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++?
>

As a current MICO maintainer I wouldn't like to make here big MICO
advertisement. I think all three orbs (OmniORB, TAO, MICO) do have its own
and so for choosing the right, you have to evaluate them, compare and
choose the most suitable for your purposes.

Cheers,

Karel
--
Karel Gardas                  kgardas@objectsecurity.com
ObjectSecurity Ltd.           http://www.objectsecurity.com