Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Java vs .NET

Posted by michael on from the flamebait dept.

CHaN_316 writes "Yahoo is running a story called 'Is Java Finished?' It provides a brief overview of the strengths and weaknesses of J2EE and contrasts them with .NET. Classic arguments are brought up like Java being great for portability while .NET ties you down to Microsoft products, etc. It's interesting that they bring up the Java Community Process, and how it is a rather slow moving procedure that is causing Java to become stagnant."

2 of 686 comments (clear)

  1. Java vs. .NET by dist_morph · · Score: 5, Informative
    I would like to point out that there are now several solutions that allow the integration of Java into .NET, so it does not have to be an either/or decision. I have run into many shops that love using Java on the server side and also love using truly native GUIs on the Windows desktops. Using the right tools, you can easily do that.

    My favorite tool for the integration is JuggerNET, which transparently starts up a JVM in the CLR process and the developer simply codes against generated .NET classes. I am affiliated with Codemesh, so I'm somewhat biased (take a look at Stu Halloway's great website for alternatives) but working with both platforms for a living, I just can't get excited about controversial this or that is dying statements. Both platforms have their strong and their weak points.

    I love the platform portability of Java, but I think Java is too closed in terns of language integration. Doing JNI by hand is an abomination, and most people at Sun admit it.

    I love the language portability of .NET (it's not perfect, but then, neither is Java's platform portability) but I hate the exception model.

    So, there you have it. Neither will kill each other, they will just coexist uncomfortably until they both get replaced with something new.

  2. Re:Java's not exactly pining for the fields just n by aagha · · Score: 5, Informative

    #1) Java was NOT originally developed for embedded systems.

    I think you might be mistaken here.

    Before the language was called 'Java', it was called 'Oak'. It was a language for building embedded applications on smart consumer electronics. However, Oak was way ahead of its time in terms of product targeting.