Interesting.

Post #126,030 by mmoffitt 11/17/03 11:07:48 AM Reply	Interesting. Can you maybe enlighten me on why a Java shop would want to make .Net look so much better? Wasn't this supposed to be the Java Community's response to Microsoft's .Net vs. J2EE comparison? I'll admit I'm lost, I just know what I read. And, I know what the "training" has shown me over the past couple of months. There is no way under the sun that I can imagine that it doesn't take a highly significant more amount of time and energy to do anything with Java than it does with .Net. And, as a bonus, you get to run that bloat (Java) slower. But, I'm just looking at Java for the first time since I am being required to. If you can show me the error in my thinking, I'll sincerely appreciate it. AFA the ranting from the Java minions go about the PetShop thing, perhaps wrongly, I dismissed that as sour grapes. I'd expect java advocates to get p.o.'d when their foo didn't do so well. bcnu, Mikem Java, Junk. Both start with a "J", both have four letters. Coincidence? I think not.
Post #126,032 by admin 11/17/03 11:14:06 AM Reply	Re: Interesting. Incompetence and lack of time. Microsoft paid for the study and they were only given so much time, most of which had to be spent creating the .NET version. As far as time spent, I would suggest that your training is probably being done by the orthodoxy. There are much faster, cleaner ways to do Java web development than EJB and JSP. "Running the bloat slower". Er, you are aware that .NET is a big JVM-like byte-code running program, right...? CLR is just another word for JVM. Sour grapes: the Java and .NET architectures weren't even remotely similar, and as such the comparison was completely unfair. You have to ask yourself, why would a Java shop accept .NET work from Microsoft in the first place... perhaps they weren't doing so well in the Java biz to begin with. Regards, -scott anderson "Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson..."
Post #126,043 by mmoffitt 11/17/03 12:12:50 PM Reply	While this is a little tame for Flame.... I appreciate your input. Yes, I know what the CLR is. And yes, I suspect I am being taught by the High Priests. I'll even concede that my unfamiliarity w/Java may be the reason that there looks to be a hell of a lot more work involved in doing simple things. But at first glance, writing Java applications appears to take a whole lot longer than writing Windows applications. And .Net app dev is whole lot less work than J2EE app dev. AFA "bloat" goes, well, I'd rather run 2,000 lines through a JVM than 14,000. >> the Java and .NET architectures weren't even remotely similar, and as such >> the comparison was completely unfair. I'll leave that alone except to say that what I read was that no stored procedures were used - which would really hurt MS Sql Server performance. >> There are much faster, cleaner ways to do Java web development than EJB and >> JSP. Links? Books? CAI references? bcnu, Mikem Java, Junk. Both start with a "J", both have four letters. Coincidence? I think not.
Post #126,082 by admin 11/17/03 2:07:32 PM 11/17/03 2:17:16 PM Reply	Re: While this is a little tame for Flame.... AFA "bloat" goes, well, I'd rather run 2,000 lines through a JVM than 14,000. Then don't write 14,000 lines of code. The TMG code is rife with duplicated code, excess code, you name it. [link\|http://www.ibatis.com/jpetstore/jpetstore.html\|http://www.ibatis.co...re/jpetstore.html] - 2692 LOC [link\|http://www.springframework.org/webapps/petclinic/html/petclinic.html\|http://www.springfra...ml/petclinic.html] - 2217 LOC Spring Framework is something I'm looking at using internally. [link\|http://xpetstore.sourceforge.net/\|http://xpetstore.sourceforge.net/ (xDoclet)] - 3251 for servlet version, 6202 for EJB version. See what I mean about EJBs? Don't use them. Very rarely does anything require an EJB, if even then. I'll leave that alone except to say that what I read was that no stored procedures were used - which would really hurt MS Sql Server performance. That's the least of it. The architectures were completely different. The .NET version used mixed up business/db logic and made heavy use of page fragment caching. The J2EE version had rigourously separated tiers and used Entity EJBs for data caching. The closer you cache the stuff to the front end, the better the performance. Entity EJBs are a horrible way to try to cache things. Links? Books? CAI references? I'm liking "J2EE Design And Development" by Rod Johnson. He doesn't pull many punches when talking about the warts of J2EE. Look at [link\|http://velocity.jakarta.org\|http://velocity.jakarta.org] in addition to the Spring Framework, as well. I haven't looked too closely at xDoclet yet, so I can't comment much other than to point out the LOC. [Edit: added xdoclet] Regards, -scott anderson "Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson..." Edited by admin Nov. 17, 2003, 02:17:16 PM EST Expand All History
Post #126,087 by mmoffitt 11/17/03 2:24:12 PM Reply	Thanks. I'm still dubious. BTW, this may be the first thread in FLAME that contains no profanity. ;0) bcnu, Mikem Java, Junk. Both start with a "J", both have four letters. Coincidence? I think not.
Post #126,097 by admin 11/17/03 2:33:31 PM Reply	Yeah? Well, bite me! :-) HTH. ;-) Regards, -scott anderson "Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson..."
Post #126,174 by CRConrad 11/17/03 6:50:47 PM Reply	This would have been one for Norm, in his Anti-Apple days... Mike Moffs itt: Java, Junk. Both start with a "J", both have four letters. Coincidence? I think not. Steve Jobs' surname is another four-letter word that begins with a J. Coinkydink? You be the judge. [link\|mailto:MyUserId@MyISP.CountryCode\|Christian R. Conrad] (I live in Finland, and my e-mail in-box is at the Saunalahti company.) Resident [link\|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=119792\|zIWETHEY pilkunnussija]

Welcome to IWETHEY!