This article should give you a glimpse at the basic thought process that
I use in the book. The version in the book is substantially more
refined, but this is the basic concept:

http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/dnadvne
t/html/vbnet01282003.asp

I do, in fact, pass objects by value across the network if you are
running in an n-tier physical configuration. To do this I rely on the
serialization support built into the .NET runtime and the way it
interacts with remoting to pass objects by value.

A side effect of moving the objects between client and server (if you
are in an n-tier physical configuration) is that the 'application' does
exist on both client and server. The complexity of keeping the clients
coordinated is mitigated to a large degree by the use of no-touch
deployment. This is discussed here

http://www.lhotka.net/Articles.aspx?id=2f5a8115-b425-4aa1-bae2-b8f80766e
cb3

And in the VB.NET Solutions Toolkit book and even more thoroughly in the
VB.NET Business Objects book.

Rocky


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ebenezer Ikonne [mailto:eikonne@M...] 
> Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2003 10:19 AM
> To: 'rocky@l...'
> Subject: Distributed Business Objects
> 
> 
> Rocky,
> 
> Thanks for your talk at VSLive in San Francisco.  It was 
> something I had been looking forward to.  However, I do have 
> a couple of questions, and I was hoping that  you'd take a 
> moment to provide some feedback.
> *	Based on your presentation, it seems like you have a full blown
> application (from an object standpoint) on both client and 
> server (assuming they exist on different physical tiers) is 
> this correct?  
> *	Secondly, you mentioned trying to incorporate a 
> service-based design
> approach to enhance performance.  It is my opinion that in a 
> service-based approach, "raw" data is passed into the 
> service.  How do you handle this using objects? Are objects 
> passed into the service, and in your demonstration, what was 
> the "service"?
> 
> These are my initial questions for now.
> 
> Thanks.
> Ebenezer
> 
> P.S.  I asked you about batch statements after part one of 
> your presentation.
>