Is java still relevant

[jaleel]

I am seriously questionging the relevance of Java and the JVM. This is a very
serious question. My question is what does java and the jvm give us now that
c#/.net/clr is out there? One of the beautiful things about java was that
it gave us the flexiblity of platform independence. One of the bad things
is that we are relegated to only using java. The CLR gives us the best of
both worlds. Platform independence(i.e., the mono project and ms port of
the clr to fbsd) and language independence. What else could we possible ask
for.

[MarkN]

"jaleel" <jaleel@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>I am seriously questionging the relevance of Java and the JVM. This is a
very
>serious question. My question is what does java and the jvm give us now
that
>c#/.net/clr is out there? One of the beautiful things about java was that
>it gave us the flexiblity of platform independence. One of the bad things
>is that we are relegated to only using java. The CLR gives us the best of
>both worlds. Platform independence(i.e., the mono project and ms port of
>the clr to fbsd) and language independence. What else could we possible
ask
>for.

First, Java is not perfect.

Second, Platform independence for .Net has not yet truly been tested or proven.
The only .Net platform that actually does anything is MS's. MS is light
years ahead of Mono. Yet they are way off from making everything .Net.
It is very unlikely that the majority of MS.Net apps will work with anything
but MS.Net (Check out their track record). MS has not provided alot of what
others will need to build their own .Net.

Third, As for language independence - if you look at the languages they
really are very similar. What's the point? Most of the languages available
have alot of baggage. It would be better to learn a new syntax and forget
old habits than to think the language is the same and continue. For anyone
to get value out of running the the CLR they will need to rewrite their code.
Might as well do it with C#. And if you write a program in COBOL.Net will
it run on Linux - anytime soon?

Fourth, Have you used a language where you don't know what exceptions will
be thrown? I have and it is horrible. Makes me look bad. If I try to code
for the unknown it makes my code and me look bad.

So what you really end up with is propaganda and vaporware with .Net. If
.Net actually VIABLY works on Linux(and the Mac and ....) and real 'programs'
can easily move between platforms and someone besides MS provides CLRs for
Windows and the other platforms then they might have something. Well, MS
probably won't have anything - and there is the fly in the ointment. You
think they will allow that? They can't.

[Tia]

"jaleel" <jaleel@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>I am seriously questionging the relevance of Java and the JVM. This is a
very
>serious question. My question is what does java and the jvm give us now
that
>c#/.net/clr is out there? One of the beautiful things about java was that
>it gave us the flexiblity of platform independence. One of the bad things
>is that we are relegated to only using java. The CLR gives us the best of
>both worlds. Platform independence(i.e., the mono project and ms port of
>the clr to fbsd) and language independence. What else could we possible
ask
>for.

Have you gone mad? Don't buy into the MS propoganda...".Net/C# is the future
of everything and Java is all but dead." This is simply not true and is just
another media ploy backed by nothing to get you locked in to MS technologies.
It is meant to keep IT folks from jumping the Windoze ship in the midst of
enforcing the new software subscription license paradigm and running scared
because Java became a much more popular language than they ever expected.
There is nothing they can do that Java can't. So you have to have a JVM to
run it, big deal. Try getting any MS app to run on Linux, you'll beg for
something as simple as installing a JVM/JRE. Java is still a very prominent
enterprise level language and continues to grow. As for similarities between
C# and Java, well, that was no accident. Bill has made a fortune from stealing
or mimicking other people's technologies.

[J.M. Nicholls]

"jaleel" <jaleel@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>I am seriously questionging the relevance of Java and the JVM. This is a
very
>serious question. My question is what does java and the jvm give us now
that
>c#/.net/clr is out there? One of the beautiful things about java was that
>it gave us the flexiblity of platform independence. One of the bad things
>is that we are relegated to only using java. The CLR gives us the best of
>both worlds. Platform independence(i.e., the mono project and ms port of
>the clr to fbsd) and language independence. What else could we possible
ask
>for.

For one thing C# will be considered a backward step in the progress towards
stable well-structed Object Oriented programming languages because it retained
direct memory addressing and pointers. For reasons of stability, better
memory management, maintainability and security Java dropped the use of direct
pointer access. The type of object addressing that is allowable in C# shows
that it really hasn't moved on that much from C++ which was only a partial
implementation of the Object Oriented model.

But the issues of the language alone are not the only reason why there is
a marked resistance to C# both in the corporate world and in the public sector.


The recent move by Microsoft to patent Open Source technologies that it did
not create does such as OpenGL does not bode well for the continuation of
C# as an open standard free of patents and royalties.

The changes in Microsoft licensing has another reason why C# is being largely
ignored. Governments around the world to consider the possibilities offered
by Open Source software as alternative to closed proprietary technologies
and even though Microsoft have submitted C# to be an ECMA standard that does
not reassure even the staunchest Microsoft supporters that C# will continue
to remain an open standard. The "embrace and extend" policy has always been
applied to create software that is dependent on a Windows environment. There
are no real indications that this not-so-hidden agenda will be abandoned
in future.

Microsoft have also confused their own customers by offering conflicting
advice regarding their recommendations for .Net development. Companies do
not know whether to standardise on C# or J# or VB.net or whether to avoid
using Microsoft proprietary languages at all since Microsoft claim that you
can develop software for the .Net environment in any language.

Java is definitely here to stay and, like Linux, is already installed on
everthing from IBM mainframes down to PDAs and cellphones. The Microsoft
strategy presentation of the .Net strategy has managed to confuse just about
everybody. This was the message of Bill Gates himself in a recent interview.


Perhaps the real question ought to be are Microsoft Windows-dependent technologies
still relevant?

In contrast with C#, Java is a proven technology that is growing in acceptance
worldwide. Few technology experts will make the same prediction for C# which
may end up as a minority niche market equivalent to that enjoyed by OS/2.


J.M. Nicholls
London

[J.M. Nicholls]

"J.M. Nicholls" <java.@127.0.0.1> wrote:
>
>"jaleel" <jaleel@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>I am seriously questionging the relevance of Java and the JVM. This is
a
>very
>>serious question. My question is what does java and the jvm give us now
>that
>>c#/.net/clr is out there? One of the beautiful things about java was that
>>it gave us the flexiblity of platform independence. One of the bad things
>>is that we are relegated to only using java. The CLR gives us the best
of
>>both worlds. Platform independence(i.e., the mono project and ms port of
>>the clr to fbsd) and language independence. What else could we possible
>ask
>>for.
>
>For one thing C# will be considered a backward step in the progress towards
>stable well-structed Object Oriented programming languages because it retained
>direct memory addressing and pointers. For reasons of stability, better
>memory management, maintainability and security Java dropped the use of
direct
>pointer access. The type of object addressing that is allowable in C# shows
>that it really hasn't moved on that much from C++ which was only a partial
>implementation of the Object Oriented model.
>
>But the issues of the language alone are not the only reason why there is
>a marked resistance to C# both in the corporate world and in the public
sector.
>
>
>The recent move by Microsoft to patent Open Source technologies that it
did
>not create does such as OpenGL does not bode well for the continuation of
>C# as an open standard free of patents and royalties.
>
>The changes in Microsoft licensing has another reason why C# is being largely
>ignored. Governments around the world to consider the possibilities offered
>by Open Source software as alternative to closed proprietary technologies
>and even though Microsoft have submitted C# to be an ECMA standard that
does
>not reassure even the staunchest Microsoft supporters that C# will continue
>to remain an open standard. The "embrace and extend" policy has always
been
>applied to create software that is dependent on a Windows environment.
There
>are no real indications that this not-so-hidden agenda will be abandoned
>in future.
>
>Microsoft have also confused their own customers by offering conflicting
>advice regarding their recommendations for .Net development. Companies
do
>not know whether to standardise on C# or J# or VB.net or whether to avoid
>using Microsoft proprietary languages at all since Microsoft claim that
you
>can develop software for the .Net environment in any language.
>
>Java is definitely here to stay and, like Linux, is already installed on
>everthing from IBM mainframes down to PDAs and cellphones. The Microsoft
>strategy presentation of the .Net strategy has managed to confuse just about
>everybody. This was the message of Bill Gates himself in a recent interview.
>
>
>Perhaps the real question ought to be are Microsoft Windows-dependent technologies
>still relevant?
>
>In contrast with C#, Java is a proven technology that is growing in acceptance
>worldwide. Few technology experts will make the same prediction for C#
which
>may end up as a minority niche market equivalent to that enjoyed by OS/2.
>
>
>J.M. Nicholls
>London
>
>

------------------------------------------------------

Sorry to comment on my own comment but I thought that readers would like
to follow the story I referred to in depth:

It is on the ZDNet site
".Net has Microsoft tongue tied" August 8, 2002, 4:20 AM PT
http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1104-948838.html

Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates has said that building the company's .Net software
architecture is more difficult than "getting to the moon or designing the
747."

But the company's massive initiative apparently faces an even tougher problem
that has nothing to do with the technology itself: explaining the meaning
of .Net to consumers, corporate executives and investors.

------------------------------------------------------

Once you work you way through the MS-speak you will probably appreciate some
of the comments in the TalkBack session where many readers view the prospect
of MS creating a 747 with abject horror:

Check out this link:

------------------------------------------------------

http://forums.com.com/group/zd.News....NODEID=&SHOST=

Re: Top ten reasons why Microsoft should not be allowed to build a 747.

Name: Patrick Mitchell
Posted At: 16:48 GMT 08/08/2002

------------------------------------------------------

Some of my colleagues in a major oil company on the South Bank has voted
this one of the most popular email attachment of the month.

I won't spoil your surprise ... take a look at it yourself.

[Khaled]

hi all,
so do u really think .net will not succeed ?
I really wish it won't succeed. but do u think M$ will invest all that in
a failure ?

do u think M$'s control over the software market won't give it the ability
to kind of "force" ppl. to use their .net ?


again I wish this whole thing would fail ... Amen !

[marck_don]

Thanks,
Absolutely. Java is everywhere from enterprise servers to phones to Microwaves. The .net stuff is definitely taking market share but Java is still out there, believe that. And their web stuff is evolving quite nicely. Java servlets, and server pages are alive and well, besides the desktop stuff.

So in short, yes. Still very relevant.

[Javapoet]

Don't doubt it. Java is very relevant and will probably end up being the most relevant language as the world moves more and more to cloud computing. The network is the computer and Java has a proven track record of making that network sing. Java is everywhere. On the network. On desktop Linux, Windows and Mac. With Android, on the smartphone. And, of course, in embedded technology. It supports a miriad of other languages too.
Java is being adopted and put into production by some of the biggest businesses on this planet. Ask them if they think it's relevant!

[Hack]

In 2002 when this thread was first created the debate regarding Java relevency might have had some merit.

But, in 2010, I think it is clear beyond a doubt that, as marc_don and Javapoet have pointed out, Java is a very relevent, and in demand, develpment platform.