Side by Side Comparison - OpenDoc vs. OLE2
From EDM2
by IBM
OpenDoc | OLE2 |
---|---|
Open System - Freely licensed to the industry through the Component Integration Laboratories. | Proprietary - Owned and controlled by Microsoft. |
SOM - Based on industry standard for object-oriented programming (CORBA). | COM - NOT CORBA compliant; no inheritance; aggregation proposed as alternative. |
Distributed - OpenDoc parts can be embedded from anywhere in the network. | Not Distributed - Can only embed objects from local OLE servers. |
Cross-platform support - OpenDoc will be available on Apple, OS/2, UNIX, and Microsoft Windows. | Only available on Microsoft Windows. |
Language Neutral - SOM bindings make OpenDoc readily available from any language. | Difficult to use with languages other than C++. |
Source code available. | Source code NOT available. |
Any part can be at the "root" of the document. | In OLE, only specialized containers can be at the "root". |
Parts can be any shape. | OLE objects must be rectangular |
OpenDoc maintains multiple draft versions of a document. | No support for multiple drafts on OLE. |
OpenDoc parts can overlap. | OLE objects CANNOT overlap. |
OpenDoc parts can be edited by clicking on them directly. | OLE objects must be activated and the content selected in order to edit it; when nested, multiple levels have to be activated. |
Development effort: 50 mandatory functions for a basic part. | Development effort: 14 different interfaces must be different interfaces must be provided with a total of 136 functions mandatory. |
Reprint Courtesy of International Business Machines Corporation, © International Business Machines Corporation