DevX Home    Today's Headlines   Articles Archive   Tip Bank   Forums   

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 45

Thread: J2EE vs DOTNET - Article

  1. #1
    John Butler Guest

    J2EE vs DOTNET - Article

    Hi

    Came across this article today:
    http://www.theserverside.com/resourc...T/article.html

    It's written by a company, FOR Sun , but is fairly neutral (I thought),
    although I don't think the authors live up to the promises they make at the
    beginning...

    If you're looking for a comparison, listing of pro's and con's etc between
    the J2EE platform and DotNet, then it is certainly worth a read.

    I'd be interested to hear what the various luminaries that hang out here
    think of it....

    Rgds
    John Butler




  2. #2
    max caber Guest

    Re: J2EE vs DOTNET - Article


    John,
    Great article and I would love to see more like it that address the pros
    and cons of both sides without a lot of bias.

    However, I wish it included a comparison on what can be done with good old
    "asp" or "jsp". What do you get from .NET or J2EE, that you "need", that
    you don't get from "asp" or "jsp"? Some may argue distributed database transaction
    support, but most applications don't use that, and MS SQL and Oracle have
    that built in anyway! By the way SOAP and ebXML can be implemented with
    any programming language that parses text.

    Max

  3. #3
    Tim Hitchings Guest

    Re: J2EE vs DOTNET - Article

    Sorry, can't believe it's 'fairly netural'.
    Read the last page?
    >>The Middleware Company is a unique group of server-side Java experts. We

    provide the industry's most advanced training, mentoring, and advice in EJB,
    J2EE, and XML-based Web Services technologies
    <<
    Seems to me they're unlikely to arrive at any other conclusion.
    I do agree that it makes for at least a good explaination of the
    technologies.

    TimH
    "John Butler" <jrbutler@nospambtclick.com> wrote in message
    news:3b8ebce3@news.devx.com...
    > Hi
    >
    > Came across this article today:
    >

    http://www.theserverside.com/resourc...T/article.html
    >
    > It's written by a company, FOR Sun , but is fairly neutral (I thought),




  4. #4
    John Butler Guest

    Re: J2EE vs DOTNET - Article


    "max caber" <maxcaber@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    news:3b8f15cb$1@news.devx.com...
    >
    > John,
    > Great article and I would love to see more like it that address the pros
    > and cons of both sides without a lot of bias.


    I liked the explanation of the platforms.....I would like to personally see
    more discussion on J2EE vs DotNet....especially in this forum....I'm kinda
    disappointed this thread turned into the old "VB Classic was OO/Not it
    wasn't" hack. I'd rather hoped to see more views on the merits/potential
    future of each option, pitfalls etc. We've re-hashed things here at a micro
    level (Java syntax vs C++ vs VB ad infinitum) but to me the broader platform
    issues are far more interesting...which has a better chance of making it,
    which is better for businesses etc..not whether squiggles are better than
    Ends...

    And MikeM please don't jump in with a "stay with VB" rant....I will be
    programming in VB6 for a while to come....but in parallel with new
    stuff....not exclusively....

    rgds
    John Butler




  5. #5
    Ralph D. Cole Guest

    Re: J2EE vs DOTNET - Article


    "John Butler" <jrbutler@nospambtclick.com> wrote:
    >
    >"max caber" <maxcaber@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    >news:3b8f15cb$1@news.devx.com...
    >>
    >> John,
    >> Great article and I would love to see more like it that address the pros
    >> and cons of both sides without a lot of bias.

    >
    >I liked the explanation of the platforms.....I would like to personally

    see
    >more discussion on J2EE vs DotNet....especially in this forum....I'm kinda
    >disappointed this thread turned into the old "VB Classic was OO/Not it
    >wasn't" hack. I'd rather hoped to see more views on the merits/potential
    >future of each option, pitfalls etc. We've re-hashed things here at a micro
    >level (Java syntax vs C++ vs VB ad infinitum) but to me the broader platform
    >issues are far more interesting...which has a better chance of making it,
    >which is better for businesses etc..not whether squiggles are better than
    >Ends...
    > ...
    >
    >rgds
    >John Butler
    >


    I agree, but I am not sure such a discussion is possible, at least not here.
    This is after all a "Windows" site. Also I am not sure such a discussion
    is even useful on a broad level, since, in general, decisions will be made
    in the board-rooms on new platforms based largely on micro-level trivial
    reasons.

    This is the last ditch fight between vendors. Overall "Technical Merit" will
    have little to do with the outcome. If you are non-Windows you HAVE to use
    J2EE, if you are Windows you will use .NET. Cognitive dissonance will be
    resolved by the platform you are on, and who is paying the bills.

    This battle is over "platforms", "us against them", "our way of life versus
    theirs". <g> Once we appreciate that Java is nothing more than VB for Unix,
    it becomes even more obvious how trivial it all is.

    The other side of "it doesn't matter" is the fact that both technologies
    CAN DO the job. Choosing one over the other doesn't limit yourself to a poorer
    feature set over the long haul.

    I agree most of this is trivial but that is the way it will be fought. For
    example, one person here lamented, "Since VB is now changed at
    the whim of MS it's not safe for our apps."????
    Where was he when M$ introduced VB4, VB5, and VB6? Pretty silly thing to
    say, but such will be carried into meetings, and everyone will nod, gravely
    and knowingly - "Hey! What about that Java thing? Bob told me on the golf
    course yesterday it NEVER changes. Let's try that." <smile>


  6. #6
    Gary Nelson Guest

    Re: J2EE vs DOTNET - Article

    Ralph,

    > I agree most of this is trivial but that is the way it will be fought. For
    > example, one person here lamented, "Since VB is now changed at
    > the whim of MS it's not safe for our apps."????
    > Where was he when M$ introduced VB4, VB5, and VB6? Pretty silly thing to
    > say, but such will be carried into meetings, and everyone will nod,

    gravely
    > and knowingly - "Hey! What about that Java thing? Bob told me on the golf
    > course yesterday it NEVER changes. Let's try that." <smile>



    I've ported a program all the way from VB1, have 140,000 lines of code in
    just one program in VB6. Porting to VB.Net looks like a bear. Will probably
    cost me several hundred thousand dollars. Doesn't seem silly to me.

    Gary



  7. #7
    Mike Mitchell Guest

    Re: J2EE vs DOTNET - Article

    On 3 Sep 2001 21:38:28 -0700, "Ralph D. Cole"
    <nt_consulting32@SPAMhotmail.com> wrote:

    >This battle is over "platforms", "us against them", "our way of life versus
    >theirs". <g> Once we appreciate that Java is nothing more than VB for Unix,
    >it becomes even more obvious how trivial it all is.


    >I agree most of this is trivial but that is the way it will be fought. For
    >example, one person here lamented, "Since VB is now changed at
    >the whim of MS it's not safe for our apps."????
    >Where was he when M$ introduced VB4, VB5, and VB6? Pretty silly thing to
    >say, but such will be carried into meetings, and everyone will nod, gravely
    >and knowingly - "Hey! What about that Java thing? Bob told me on the golf
    >course yesterday it NEVER changes. Let's try that." <smile>


    Another thing that may be carried into meetings is your assertion that
    "Java is nothing more than VB for Unix", which is so patently untrue I
    wonder whether you were actually thinking when you wrote it. Java is
    about as far removed from VB as I am from the presidency. Let's hope
    when they come out of the meeting they'll read this as well.

    MM

  8. #8
    Ralph D. Cole Guest

    Re: J2EE vs DOTNET - Article


    "Gary Nelson" <gn@contanet.es> wrote:
    >
    >I've ported a program all the way from VB1, have 140,000 lines of code in
    >just one program in VB6. Porting to VB.Net looks like a bear. Will probably
    >cost me several hundred thousand dollars. Doesn't seem silly to me.
    >
    >Gary
    >


    There is NO good reason to sit down and port a 140,000 line VB6 application
    to VB.NET. NOW that would be silly. Shame on you for even suggesting it in
    a public forum. (Other developers, less experienced than you might read it
    and believe it to be a valid option.)

    Assuming you have a good OO model and have 'componentized' and distributed
    your solution. Migrating part of your application to VB.NET and to a managed
    environment, as "NEEDED", should be all in a day's work for a modern software
    development effort.

    If on the other hand you are sitting there with a huge collage of monolithic
    linear code - expensive overhauls were in your future anyway.

    Frankly, .NET is a fundamental architectural change in the way we design
    and implement solutions. Simple 'ports' or code-translations at the program
    level will not in most cases bring about any immediate or long-range benefit.
    Rather, as new and expanded features are needed you will pull from the .NET
    technology bag new methods and tools to provide quicker and easier solutions.

    I doubt your VB6 application bares much resemblance to your original VB1
    application. If it does, then you are not taking advantage of the technologies
    available to you. Your VB.NET applications will be equally unique. Managing
    change is part of our job description. To willy-nilly port code to something
    different for the sake of change is just plain irresponsible.

    [Sidbar:
    Perhaps it will be easier, once you appreciate that VB.NET is NOT VB7!

    It is imperfect, but the best analogy I can come up with is the C vs. C++
    and the single tier client/server vs. DCOM struggle we went through in the
    last decade. Did we go in and rip the guts out of every client database application,
    or did we replace them with more elegent solutions? Did we wholesale 'port'
    C programs to C++? We did go through a "C++ as a better C" phase, but in
    general we waited until we needed to add features and repair pieces of legacy
    systems to apply the new tools. And with these new tools we provided better,
    simplier, more robust solutions.

    The same will happen with VB.NET.
    ]



  9. #9
    Ralph D. Cole Guest

    Re: J2EE vs DOTNET - Article


    kylix_is@hotmail.com (Mike Mitchell) wrote:
    >On 3 Sep 2001 21:38:28 -0700, "Ralph D. Cole"
    ><nt_consulting32@SPAMhotmail.com> wrote:
    >
    > ....
    >Another thing that may be carried into meetings is your assertion that
    >"Java is nothing more than VB for Unix", which is so patently untrue I
    >wonder whether you were actually thinking when you wrote it. Java is
    >about as far removed from VB as I am from the presidency. Let's hope
    >when they come out of the meeting they'll read this as well.
    >
    >MM


    To the contrary, to not appreciate Java's "VB" role in J2EE is to miss the
    entire point of "J2EE vs DOTNET". Specific language elements withstanding
    they both serve exactly the same purpose in their respective environments
    - to provide a friendly RAD tool.

    It is exactly this non-recognition of the larger picture that leads to discussions
    of trivialities and why broad-view comparisons are so difficult.


  10. #10
    Joe \Nuke Me Xemu\ Foster Guest

    Re: J2EE vs DOTNET - Article

    "Ralph D. Cole" <nt_consulting32@SPAMhotmail.com> wrote in message <news:3b94f674$1@news.devx.com>...

    > "Gary Nelson" <gn@contanet.es> wrote:


    > >I've ported a program all the way from VB1, have 140,000 lines of code in
    > >just one program in VB6. Porting to VB.Net looks like a bear. Will probably
    > >cost me several hundred thousand dollars. Doesn't seem silly to me.


    > There is NO good reason to sit down and port a 140,000 line VB6 application
    > to VB.NET. NOW that would be silly. Shame on you for even suggesting it in
    > a public forum. (Other developers, less experienced than you might read it
    > and believe it to be a valid option.)


    YES, there is: when, not if, Windows XP2 breaks VB Classic apps. HTH!

    --
    Joe Foster <mailto:jlfoster%40znet.com> Got Thetans? <http://www.xenu.net/>
    WARNING: I cannot be held responsible for the above They're coming to
    because my cats have apparently learned to type. take me away, ha ha!



  11. #11
    Gary Nelson Guest

    Re: J2EE vs DOTNET - Article

    > There is NO good reason to sit down and port a 140,000 line VB6
    application
    > to VB.NET. NOW that would be silly. Shame on you for even suggesting it in
    > a public forum. (Other developers, less experienced than you might read it
    > and believe it to be a valid option.)
    >


    What do you do for a living Ralph?

    What code base do you have in VB6?

    > Assuming you have a good OO model and have 'componentized' and distributed
    > your solution. Migrating part of your application to VB.NET and to a

    managed
    > environment, as "NEEDED", should be all in a day's work for a modern

    software
    > development effort.


    All in a day's work? In your dreams.

    Just as a simple example: In what way are control arrays in opposition to a
    good OO model? I use control arrays extensively, and I calculate that just
    the conversion from control arrays to arrays of controls will take several
    weeks.

    > Simple 'ports' or code-translations at the program
    > level will not in most cases bring about any immediate or long-range

    benefit.

    That sounds very reassuring.

    > Rather, as new and expanded features are needed you will pull from the

    ..NET
    > technology bag new methods and tools to provide quicker and easier

    solutions.

    I would have like to have received the new without having my code killed.

    > I doubt your VB6 application bares much resemblance to your original VB1
    > application.


    True, but I have continuously worked on the same code base. Some of the code
    base has not changed since VB1, and in fact some of the code goes all the
    way back to gwbasic, through QB and PDS.

    > If it does, then you are not taking advantage of the technologies
    > available to you.


    Aside from the main program (140,000 lines of code) I have 3 DLLs (only
    possible since VB4), 3 OCXs (only possible since VB5), and a remote OLE
    server. I might add also a plug-in for Excel, and about 30 other
    complementary executables to the main program.

    I use classes, collections, the Windows API, hooks and callbacks.

    But I also use GoSubs. GoSubs are very nice for several reasons: You don't
    have to stop program execution to add one, and they are useful for small
    sections of code that are used only by a specific subroutine. In fact my
    main program has nearly 1000 Gosubs. Try to fix a thousand Gosubs in a day!

    > Your VB.NET applications will be equally unique. Managing
    > change is part of our job description. To willy-nilly port code to

    something
    > different for the sake of change is just plain irresponsible.


    Your comment is just plain irresponsible!!!

    I make a living selling programs, and I'm not planning on retiring yet. Lets
    face it VB6 is dead. MS has put us into the position of port or die.

    I find that most of those who express opinions similar to yours fall into
    one of the following categories.

    1) C or C++ programmers who are gloating over the misfortune of VB
    programmers
    2) Writers of books or articles on programming
    3) VB programmers who have never written any decent code
    4) VB programmers who have only written "one shot" programs. That is to
    say, programs that were only used for one specific purpose and then
    discarded.

    I've never met a VB programer with a good code base who has expressed your
    opinion.

    Gary



  12. #12
    Patrick Troughton Guest

    Re: J2EE vs DOTNET - Article


    Hi Gary,

    "Gary Nelson" <gn@contanet.es> wrote:
    >I find that most of those who express opinions similar to yours fall into
    >one of the following categories.
    >
    >1) C or C++ programmers who are gloating over the misfortune of VB
    >programmers


    Misfortune? VB.NET is the biggest and best upgrade to Visual Basic ever -
    period - end of story. In fact, if you rolled all the improvements Microsoft
    has ever made to VB, starting from VB1 going all the way through VB6, it
    will still only be a fraction of what VB.NET brings to the table.

    >2) Writers of books or articles on programming


    I have never written a book or article.

    >3) VB programmers who have never written any decent code


    Decent is subjective, but I'll wager that my code is better than most.

    >4) VB programmers who have only written "one shot" programs. That is to
    >say, programs that were only used for one specific purpose and then
    >discarded.


    At my current job, the application I work on is over 100,000 lines of code
    and is used by some of the biggest retailers in the world.

    >I've never met a VB programer with a good code base who has expressed your
    >opinion.


    Hi Gary, my name is Patrick. Pleased to meet you.

    /Pat

  13. #13
    David A. Rothgery Guest

    Re: J2EE vs DOTNET - Article

    Patrick Troughton <Patrick@Troughton.com> wrote:
    >
    > Hi Gary,
    >
    > "Gary Nelson" <gn@contanet.es> wrote:
    > >I find that most of those who express opinions similar to yours fall into
    > >one of the following categories.
    > >
    > >1) C or C++ programmers who are gloating over the misfortune of VB
    > >programmers

    >
    > Misfortune? VB.NET is the biggest and best upgrade to Visual Basic ever -
    > period - end of story. In fact, if you rolled all the improvements Microsoft
    > has ever made to VB, starting from VB1 going all the way through VB6, it
    > will still only be a fraction of what VB.NET brings to the table.


    And well, I haven't used C or C++ for anything since college, except
    helping my kid brother with his coursework.

    > >2) Writers of books or articles on programming

    >
    > I have never written a book or article.


    Ditto.

    > >3) VB programmers who have never written any decent code

    >
    > Decent is subjective, but I'll wager that my code is better than most.


    Ditto.

    > >4) VB programmers who have only written "one shot" programs. That is to
    > >say, programs that were only used for one specific purpose and then
    > >discarded.

    >
    > At my current job, the application I work on is over 100,000 lines of code
    > and is used by some of the biggest retailers in the world.


    Here, you might have a little bit of a case. I'm a web guy, and web
    projects tend to be rebuilt, at least on the UI level, every few months
    on general principle[1]. And I will occasionally trash code that has
    been written by consultants and maintained by four different people
    since then, each with less understanding of the original code than the
    previous one, rather than trying to make sense of it.

    [1] Which is why on the project I just did, this should take changes to
    a handful of files...

    --
    Dave Rothgery
    Picking nits since 1976
    drothgery@myrealbox.com
    http://drothgery.editthispage.com

  14. #14
    Ed Courtenay Guest

    Re: J2EE vs DOTNET - Article




    "Gary Nelson" <gn@contanet.es> wrote in message
    news:3b95f6a6@news.devx.com...
    > <snip/>
    > I find that most of those who express opinions similar to yours fall into
    > one of the following categories.
    >
    > 1) C or C++ programmers who are gloating over the misfortune of VB
    > programmers


    Although I spend equal amounts of time developing in C++/Java/VB, I can't
    say I've ever felt that way.

    > 2) Writers of books or articles on programming


    Nope

    > 3) VB programmers who have never written any decent code


    <modest>I think my code is better than a lot I've seen from other
    developers.</modest>

    > 4) VB programmers who have only written "one shot" programs. That is to
    > say, programs that were only used for one specific purpose and then
    > discarded.


    Nope - various projects from very large to very small scale development

    >
    > I've never met a VB programer with a good code base who has expressed your
    > opinion.
    >


    Well, we may never meet physically, but you can mark me down as a VB
    programmer with a good codebase, who simply can't wait to get going
    full-time with VB.NET.

    --
    Ed Courtenay
    http://www.edcourtenay.co.uk

    "We've all heard that a million monkeys on a million
    keyboards would eventually come up with the entire
    works of Shakespeare - thanks to the Internet, we now
    know this isn't true...."



  15. #15
    Gary Nelson Guest

    Re: J2EE vs DOTNET - Article

    Patrick,

    > At my current job, the application I work on is over 100,000 lines of code
    > and is used by some of the biggest retailers in the world.


    VB code?

    How much of it did you write?

    Will any of it be ported to VB.Net?

    What are the perspectives for the conversion?

    Gary




Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
HTML5 Development Center
 
 
FAQ
Latest Articles
Java
.NET
XML
Database
Enterprise
Questions? Contact us.
C++
Web Development
Wireless
Latest Tips
Open Source


   Development Centers

   -- Android Development Center
   -- Cloud Development Project Center
   -- HTML5 Development Center
   -- Windows Mobile Development Center