[omniORB] omniORB compared to TAO

[Thomas Lockhart]

> I was wondering if anyone has used both OmniORB and TAO? It took me awhile
> to finally get omniORB installed but I now have done a few prototypes in
> OmniORB and TAO and would like some assistance in deciding between the two.
> I noticed the code size  is much, much larger with TAO than with OmniORB and
> also that OmniORB generates a lot less files.  Aside from not  having an
> implementation repository, I don't know how the two different in significant
> ways.  Any comments would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.

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.

If omniORB does what you need on the platforms you are interested in, 
then there is not much reason to look elsewhere afaict. btw, it seems an 
implementation repository for omniORB is not that far away now...

                     - Tom