Priorty Interrupt by Steve Ciarcia For Once, I Sort of Agree

It's not often that I agree with Bill Gates, I assure you. From a technology viewpoint, we are worlds apart. My idea of computerizing something is a vision of making its operation simpler and more efficient. Every time I get involved in one of Bill's visions, I end up having to buy a new computer. Certainly, we don't debate that these offerings contain a modicum of enhancements and improvements. However, having to triple or quadruple the horsepower of your PC each time you upgrade the software leaves a lot to be desired. But don't worry, this isn't a tirade against Microsoft and I'm not going to reminisce about how much we used to do on an 8-bit processor with 64 KB.

Fact is, there's one issue where I might have to agree with Bill. In this latest face-off with the government, the makers of Netscape argue that a browser and an operating system are two separate things. It's OK to have customers buy your operating system, but to force them to all use your browser is monopolizing. Microsoft insists that there is no defining line between an operating system and browser. Supporting this opinion is the reality that a browser seems to be the user interface of choice in a majority of recently introduced software applications. Microsoft contends it is a natural evolution of technology.

I suspect that all those people who enjoy browsing the 'Net have a great deal to do with that evolution. It only takes visiting a few Web sites and executing a few online transactions to quickly realize that your browser is a universal entry vehicle into other systems. It gives you all the benefits of executing the online application without concern for the host's operating system or processor type.

The good news is that for many applications it offers a standard interface model. A remotely monitored refinery tank farm could have a unique communication protocol and a custom display medium. That would be the traditional approach. Today, however, it probably makes far more sense to design the monitoring system so it can interact with a browser. The user simply has to dial up the tank farm from anywhere with any computer and see what's going on.

There are clear advantages to using a browser as a front end for software applications. The user interface serves as an effective isolation between the user and the physical application hardware. Software changes and technical support need only be applied at the application end rather than to each user site. Want to expand the tank farm? Simply change the monitoring electronics and server software. The next time the user checks in, the browser shows 20 additional tanks. No fuss, no muss, no wiring.

The bad news is that there will be increased demand for everything being browser compatible. If we're not careful how it's done, browser-based closed-loop monitoring and control can become cutesy and inefficient. One of the things we have to be careful about in all this is that all this user interface and application isolation doesn't get out of hand. While it's easy to conclude that a browser makes an ideal user interface, I'm not all that convinced that enough thought is being given to the browser application itself. I don't write a lot of software, but I certainly believe that designing software for a browser application is significantly different than for a stand-alone operating system.

Someone suggested to me that there is a simple test to illustrate the obvious answer. Pick a dozen Web users at your office and look at their favorite-sites list. Invariably, Yahoo or Altavista, two of the 50+ search-engine sites, will appear on their list. If you ask why, most users simply say that it's because these sites are fast.

There's a natural tendency for developers to include fancy graphics, multiple windows, and lots of bells and whistles in their presentation pages. Yahoo and Altavista are fast because they avoid bandwidth-eating graphics and high-end features. We've all experienced the excruciating wait at Web sites that download page after page of useless, albeit flashy, graphics before they get to an index page. You could have breezed through a half dozen Yahoo pages in the same time.

Future implementation of browsers in embedded system applications is a given. Successful execution, however, is a careful balance between bandwidth and UI graphic necessity. I realize that the experience of the past suggests that one answer is to simply force us all to increase the bandwidth and computer horsepower once again. The other option is to put a little more thought behind this kind of software.

Yes, Bill, this is one of those occasions that I agree with you. Indeed, there isn't a clear line between browser and operating system anymore. Agreeing with you, however, doesn't mean that I'm willing to live with only one brand.

steve.ciarcia@circuitcellar.com

Published: March-1998