IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 1 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New So don't use it.
J2EE is overkill for 99% of the projects out there. JBuilder + JSP + something like Struts is more akin to .NET. If you need multiple servers, use shared sessions or JMS to parcel things out. Something like Orion Server or OC4J even has a (more flexible) page fragment caching than .NET as well.

I gave up on J2EE long ago. What a clusterfsck. EJBs are sorry, sorry little pathetic things.
Regards,

-scott anderson

"Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson..."
New Re: So don't use it.
Just to set the record straight, the J2EE specification *includes* EJB's, but does not dictate them (of course, that means a J2EE-compliant application server MUST provide them...). Unfortunately, all too often, J2EE gets blamed for the heaviness of EJB's. This is unfortunate, as EJB's are there for a reason (and a good one), but typically aren't necessary (even in many enterprise situations).

JSP's/servlets, JMS, JDBC, JavaMail, etc. are all part of the J2EE spec. And though JDO isn't, it can certainly handle most of the persistence requirements a project may have.

Dan
     OpEd: How to get MSFT back to $100/share. - (mmoffitt) - (11)
         "Beware of Greeks Bearing Gifts". -NT - (a6l6e6x) - (1)
             "Someone forgot to tell the Trojans..." - (inthane-chan)
         So don't use it. - (admin) - (1)
             Re: So don't use it. - (dshellman)
         Re: OpEd: How to get MSFT back to $100/share. - (dshellman) - (1)
             EJBs would take that much extra code. - (admin)
         What was old is new again! - (jb4) - (4)
             So, do you agree? -NT - (mmoffitt) - (2)
                 Oh, absolutely! - (jb4) - (1)
                     Re: What do you know? - (mmoffitt)
             I know; must be why the OP language is "Delphi" from v 7 :-) -NT - (CRConrad)

IANK.
55 ms