J2EE vs .NET Arguments
-
Here's a J2EE vs .NET document given to me recently by my boss. This one is "Prepared for Sun Microsystems" by The Middleware Company so naturally it's biased toward J2EE. It's also not very well written, grammar-wise... but that's another story. Here are their concluding arguments. See if you agree: Arguments supporting both platforms • Regardless of which platform you pick, new developers will need to be trained (Java training for J2EE, OO training for .NET) • You can build web services today using both platforms • Both platforms offer a low system cost, such as jBoss/Linux/Cobalt for J2EE, or Windows/Win32 hardware for .NET. • Both platforms offer a single-vendor solution. • The scalability of both solutions are theoretically unlimited. Arguments for .NET and against J2EE • .NET has Microsoft's A-team marketing it • .NET released their web services story before J2EE did, and thus has some mind-share • .NET has a better story for shared context today than J2EE • .NET has an awesome tool story with Visual Studio.NET • .NET has a simpler programming model, enabling rank-and-file developers to be productive without shooting themselves in the foot • .NET gives you language neutrality when developing new eBusiness applications, whereas J2EE makes you treat other languages as separate applications • .NET benefits from being strongly interweaved with the underlying operating system Arguments for J2EE and against .NET • J2EE is being marketed by an entire industry • J2EE is a proven platform, with a few new web services APIs. .NET is a rewrite and introduces risk as with any first-generation technology • Only J2EE lets you deploy web services today • Existing J2EE code will translate into a J2EE web services system without major rewrites. Not true for Windows DNA code ported to .NET. • .NET web services are not interoperable with current industry standards. Their BizTalk framework has proprietary SOAP extensions and does not support ebXML. • J2EE is a more advanced programming model, appropriate for well-trained developers who want to build more advanced object models and take advantage of performance features • J2EE lets you take advantage of existing hardware you may have • J2EE gives you platform neutrality, including Windows. You also get good (but not free)
-
Here's a J2EE vs .NET document given to me recently by my boss. This one is "Prepared for Sun Microsystems" by The Middleware Company so naturally it's biased toward J2EE. It's also not very well written, grammar-wise... but that's another story. Here are their concluding arguments. See if you agree: Arguments supporting both platforms • Regardless of which platform you pick, new developers will need to be trained (Java training for J2EE, OO training for .NET) • You can build web services today using both platforms • Both platforms offer a low system cost, such as jBoss/Linux/Cobalt for J2EE, or Windows/Win32 hardware for .NET. • Both platforms offer a single-vendor solution. • The scalability of both solutions are theoretically unlimited. Arguments for .NET and against J2EE • .NET has Microsoft's A-team marketing it • .NET released their web services story before J2EE did, and thus has some mind-share • .NET has a better story for shared context today than J2EE • .NET has an awesome tool story with Visual Studio.NET • .NET has a simpler programming model, enabling rank-and-file developers to be productive without shooting themselves in the foot • .NET gives you language neutrality when developing new eBusiness applications, whereas J2EE makes you treat other languages as separate applications • .NET benefits from being strongly interweaved with the underlying operating system Arguments for J2EE and against .NET • J2EE is being marketed by an entire industry • J2EE is a proven platform, with a few new web services APIs. .NET is a rewrite and introduces risk as with any first-generation technology • Only J2EE lets you deploy web services today • Existing J2EE code will translate into a J2EE web services system without major rewrites. Not true for Windows DNA code ported to .NET. • .NET web services are not interoperable with current industry standards. Their BizTalk framework has proprietary SOAP extensions and does not support ebXML. • J2EE is a more advanced programming model, appropriate for well-trained developers who want to build more advanced object models and take advantage of performance features • J2EE lets you take advantage of existing hardware you may have • J2EE gives you platform neutrality, including Windows. You also get good (but not free)
I have read this whole article before, it is out of date b/c it was referencing Beta 1 or 2. Alvaro Mendez wrote: J2EE lets you use Java, which is better than C# due to market-share and maturity. According to Gartner, there are 2.5 million Java developers. IDC predicts this will grow to 4 million by 2003. 78% universities teach Java, and 50% of universities require Java. Just b/c something is widely used doesn't mean it's better. VB is one of largest user bases but it still sucks. Alvaro Mendez wrote: We would not want to use any language other than C# or Java for development of new mission-critical solutions, such as a hacked object-oriented version of C, VB, or COBOL. VB.NET isn't a hack. It's a true OO language. VB6 and below are hacks. Alvaro Mendez wrote: • Existing J2EE code will translate into a J2EE web services system without major rewrites. Not true for Windows DNA code ported to .NET. With the soap toolkit, which existed before .NET, I could wrap a COM object with a webservice using a wizard. Show me a Java tool that will do that. The authors try to make their article seem unbiased but infact it is greatly slanted towards Java. There are many half-truths about .NET in this article that I have a problem with, too many to list. Jason Gerard
-
Here's a J2EE vs .NET document given to me recently by my boss. This one is "Prepared for Sun Microsystems" by The Middleware Company so naturally it's biased toward J2EE. It's also not very well written, grammar-wise... but that's another story. Here are their concluding arguments. See if you agree: Arguments supporting both platforms • Regardless of which platform you pick, new developers will need to be trained (Java training for J2EE, OO training for .NET) • You can build web services today using both platforms • Both platforms offer a low system cost, such as jBoss/Linux/Cobalt for J2EE, or Windows/Win32 hardware for .NET. • Both platforms offer a single-vendor solution. • The scalability of both solutions are theoretically unlimited. Arguments for .NET and against J2EE • .NET has Microsoft's A-team marketing it • .NET released their web services story before J2EE did, and thus has some mind-share • .NET has a better story for shared context today than J2EE • .NET has an awesome tool story with Visual Studio.NET • .NET has a simpler programming model, enabling rank-and-file developers to be productive without shooting themselves in the foot • .NET gives you language neutrality when developing new eBusiness applications, whereas J2EE makes you treat other languages as separate applications • .NET benefits from being strongly interweaved with the underlying operating system Arguments for J2EE and against .NET • J2EE is being marketed by an entire industry • J2EE is a proven platform, with a few new web services APIs. .NET is a rewrite and introduces risk as with any first-generation technology • Only J2EE lets you deploy web services today • Existing J2EE code will translate into a J2EE web services system without major rewrites. Not true for Windows DNA code ported to .NET. • .NET web services are not interoperable with current industry standards. Their BizTalk framework has proprietary SOAP extensions and does not support ebXML. • J2EE is a more advanced programming model, appropriate for well-trained developers who want to build more advanced object models and take advantage of performance features • J2EE lets you take advantage of existing hardware you may have • J2EE gives you platform neutrality, including Windows. You also get good (but not free)
I like this one: Alvaro Mendez wrote: We would not want to use any language other than C# or Java for development of new mission-critical solutions, such as a hacked object-oriented version of C These guys have some serious problems in their lives... I vote pro drink :beer:
-
I like this one: Alvaro Mendez wrote: We would not want to use any language other than C# or Java for development of new mission-critical solutions, such as a hacked object-oriented version of C These guys have some serious problems in their lives... I vote pro drink :beer:
-
Jacksonh wrote: By 'hacked object-oriented version of C' do they mean C++? Yes. It seems so. X| I vote pro drink :beer:
-
They are probably referring to Managed Extensions for C++. However, just goes to show you how much these dumbass actually know. And if they are referring to regular C++, how is it a hack? Jason Gerard
-
I have read this whole article before, it is out of date b/c it was referencing Beta 1 or 2. Alvaro Mendez wrote: J2EE lets you use Java, which is better than C# due to market-share and maturity. According to Gartner, there are 2.5 million Java developers. IDC predicts this will grow to 4 million by 2003. 78% universities teach Java, and 50% of universities require Java. Just b/c something is widely used doesn't mean it's better. VB is one of largest user bases but it still sucks. Alvaro Mendez wrote: We would not want to use any language other than C# or Java for development of new mission-critical solutions, such as a hacked object-oriented version of C, VB, or COBOL. VB.NET isn't a hack. It's a true OO language. VB6 and below are hacks. Alvaro Mendez wrote: • Existing J2EE code will translate into a J2EE web services system without major rewrites. Not true for Windows DNA code ported to .NET. With the soap toolkit, which existed before .NET, I could wrap a COM object with a webservice using a wizard. Show me a Java tool that will do that. The authors try to make their article seem unbiased but infact it is greatly slanted towards Java. There are many half-truths about .NET in this article that I have a problem with, too many to list. Jason Gerard
78% universities teach Java, and 50% of universities require Java. To add to that, when did universities ever teach C++ to any degree? I guess there was a year or two in the 90s (maybe, depending on which uni you went to). And yet what was required in industry? Uh, C++! Further proof that academia is WAY removed from industry. It's been that way and will continue. Most young uni students I know scrunch up their noses at pointers and think C++ is "too hard" because they just were never taught properly at uni. CodeGuy The WTL newsgroup: over 1300 members! Be a part of it. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wtl
-
Here's a J2EE vs .NET document given to me recently by my boss. This one is "Prepared for Sun Microsystems" by The Middleware Company so naturally it's biased toward J2EE. It's also not very well written, grammar-wise... but that's another story. Here are their concluding arguments. See if you agree: Arguments supporting both platforms • Regardless of which platform you pick, new developers will need to be trained (Java training for J2EE, OO training for .NET) • You can build web services today using both platforms • Both platforms offer a low system cost, such as jBoss/Linux/Cobalt for J2EE, or Windows/Win32 hardware for .NET. • Both platforms offer a single-vendor solution. • The scalability of both solutions are theoretically unlimited. Arguments for .NET and against J2EE • .NET has Microsoft's A-team marketing it • .NET released their web services story before J2EE did, and thus has some mind-share • .NET has a better story for shared context today than J2EE • .NET has an awesome tool story with Visual Studio.NET • .NET has a simpler programming model, enabling rank-and-file developers to be productive without shooting themselves in the foot • .NET gives you language neutrality when developing new eBusiness applications, whereas J2EE makes you treat other languages as separate applications • .NET benefits from being strongly interweaved with the underlying operating system Arguments for J2EE and against .NET • J2EE is being marketed by an entire industry • J2EE is a proven platform, with a few new web services APIs. .NET is a rewrite and introduces risk as with any first-generation technology • Only J2EE lets you deploy web services today • Existing J2EE code will translate into a J2EE web services system without major rewrites. Not true for Windows DNA code ported to .NET. • .NET web services are not interoperable with current industry standards. Their BizTalk framework has proprietary SOAP extensions and does not support ebXML. • J2EE is a more advanced programming model, appropriate for well-trained developers who want to build more advanced object models and take advantage of performance features • J2EE lets you take advantage of existing hardware you may have • J2EE gives you platform neutrality, including Windows. You also get good (but not free)
Almost every argument against .NET sounds like F.U.D. to me ;) Cheers, Tom Archer Author, Inside C#
-
Here's a J2EE vs .NET document given to me recently by my boss. This one is "Prepared for Sun Microsystems" by The Middleware Company so naturally it's biased toward J2EE. It's also not very well written, grammar-wise... but that's another story. Here are their concluding arguments. See if you agree: Arguments supporting both platforms • Regardless of which platform you pick, new developers will need to be trained (Java training for J2EE, OO training for .NET) • You can build web services today using both platforms • Both platforms offer a low system cost, such as jBoss/Linux/Cobalt for J2EE, or Windows/Win32 hardware for .NET. • Both platforms offer a single-vendor solution. • The scalability of both solutions are theoretically unlimited. Arguments for .NET and against J2EE • .NET has Microsoft's A-team marketing it • .NET released their web services story before J2EE did, and thus has some mind-share • .NET has a better story for shared context today than J2EE • .NET has an awesome tool story with Visual Studio.NET • .NET has a simpler programming model, enabling rank-and-file developers to be productive without shooting themselves in the foot • .NET gives you language neutrality when developing new eBusiness applications, whereas J2EE makes you treat other languages as separate applications • .NET benefits from being strongly interweaved with the underlying operating system Arguments for J2EE and against .NET • J2EE is being marketed by an entire industry • J2EE is a proven platform, with a few new web services APIs. .NET is a rewrite and introduces risk as with any first-generation technology • Only J2EE lets you deploy web services today • Existing J2EE code will translate into a J2EE web services system without major rewrites. Not true for Windows DNA code ported to .NET. • .NET web services are not interoperable with current industry standards. Their BizTalk framework has proprietary SOAP extensions and does not support ebXML. • J2EE is a more advanced programming model, appropriate for well-trained developers who want to build more advanced object models and take advantage of performance features • J2EE lets you take advantage of existing hardware you may have • J2EE gives you platform neutrality, including Windows. You also get good (but not free)
So many places to comment, but I'll just make one: We would not want to use any language other than C# or Java for development of new mission-critical solutions, such as a hacked object-oriented version of C, VB, or COBOL. How is this FOR J2EE ? It's equally for both, and the second half is their preference, and a clear jibe at MC. COBOL.NET does not even ship from Microsoft, what is their problem ? Christian The tragedy of cyberspace - that so much can travel so far, and yet mean so little. "I'm thinking of getting married for companionship and so I have someone to cook and clean." - Martin Marvinski, 6/3/2002
-
I have read this whole article before, it is out of date b/c it was referencing Beta 1 or 2. Alvaro Mendez wrote: J2EE lets you use Java, which is better than C# due to market-share and maturity. According to Gartner, there are 2.5 million Java developers. IDC predicts this will grow to 4 million by 2003. 78% universities teach Java, and 50% of universities require Java. Just b/c something is widely used doesn't mean it's better. VB is one of largest user bases but it still sucks. Alvaro Mendez wrote: We would not want to use any language other than C# or Java for development of new mission-critical solutions, such as a hacked object-oriented version of C, VB, or COBOL. VB.NET isn't a hack. It's a true OO language. VB6 and below are hacks. Alvaro Mendez wrote: • Existing J2EE code will translate into a J2EE web services system without major rewrites. Not true for Windows DNA code ported to .NET. With the soap toolkit, which existed before .NET, I could wrap a COM object with a webservice using a wizard. Show me a Java tool that will do that. The authors try to make their article seem unbiased but infact it is greatly slanted towards Java. There are many half-truths about .NET in this article that I have a problem with, too many to list. Jason Gerard
Does VB.NET look like C ? The reference to VB made me think the 'hacked OO version of C' is managed C++, probably because I assume MC++ has no generics. Christian The tragedy of cyberspace - that so much can travel so far, and yet mean so little. "I'm thinking of getting married for companionship and so I have someone to cook and clean." - Martin Marvinski, 6/3/2002
-
78% universities teach Java, and 50% of universities require Java. To add to that, when did universities ever teach C++ to any degree? I guess there was a year or two in the 90s (maybe, depending on which uni you went to). And yet what was required in industry? Uh, C++! Further proof that academia is WAY removed from industry. It's been that way and will continue. Most young uni students I know scrunch up their noses at pointers and think C++ is "too hard" because they just were never taught properly at uni. CodeGuy The WTL newsgroup: over 1300 members! Be a part of it. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wtl
CodeGuy wrote: Most young uni students I know scrunch up their noses at pointers and think C++ is "too hard" because they just were never taught properly at uni. A friend went to Uni and kept telling me C++ was obsolete because of Java. He sits in the next room at work now, coding in C++. Everyone here bar me went to Uni and learned Java. Not one person uses it at work. The benefits of an education.... Christian The tragedy of cyberspace - that so much can travel so far, and yet mean so little. "I'm thinking of getting married for companionship and so I have someone to cook and clean." - Martin Marvinski, 6/3/2002
-
Does VB.NET look like C ? The reference to VB made me think the 'hacked OO version of C' is managed C++, probably because I assume MC++ has no generics. Christian The tragedy of cyberspace - that so much can travel so far, and yet mean so little. "I'm thinking of getting married for companionship and so I have someone to cook and clean." - Martin Marvinski, 6/3/2002
MC++ doesn't have generices. VB.NET looks like VB but with more keywords. Jason Gerard