Higgins vs. Virtual Directory

Can someone tell me the significant difference between a virtual directory and Higgins (besides Higgins is open source)?  I get the impression this is not a popular question.  While at DIDW I suggested we should rename Higgins to Virtual Directory 2.0.  The response was “Shush, don’t say that.”  I don’t really like dancing around issues.

 Mike

4 Responses to “Higgins vs. Virtual Directory”

  1. Dave Kearns Says:

    The Penrose project is the Open Source virtual directory, Mike. Higgins is both more than, and quite a bit less than, a virtual directory.

  2. Mike Beach Says:

    Dave,

    Thanks for the pointer to Penrose, I am not looking for a virtual directory but it is great to know these things are out there. Could you elaborate just a little, or point me to something that elaborates on the more and less answer?

    What I have seen so far (and a number of my colleagues agree) is this is a virtual directory. It seems a bit more extensible by design than some current products and claims user-centricity, but it sure looks like a virtual directory.

    Since you and others have disagreed with this point of view I am trying to identify the significant distinctions so that I can communicate them and understand the implications – after all, this does seem to be some of the leading edge.

    Mike

  3. Pete Rowley » Higgins: lego brick or gear stick? Says:

    [...] Mike Beach is obviously a fellow who likes to ask the hard questions. This time he is asking how Higgins differs from a virtual directory. There is some level of confusion out there so in order to add a little clarity my answer would be that the difference is one of perspective and granularity. QED. [...]

  4. Albina-gc Says:

    vmicq ñìîòðåòü ïîðíî âèäåî ðîëèêè qip com ñêà÷àòü qip 9022 infium ñàìàÿ íîâàÿ âåðñèÿ icq

Leave a Reply