Slashdot Mirror


Java Is So 90s

An anonymous reader writes "Some of you may recall last year's Java vs. LAMP Slashdot flamewar. The fight has now "brewed" (couldn't resist) into the mainstream press at BusinessWeek." From the article: "Yared says developers far and wide are creating a new generation of Internet-based applications with LAMP and related technologies rather than with Java. Can it possibly be that Java -- once the hippest of hip software -- has become a legacy technology, as old and out of style as IBM's (IBM) mainframe computers and SAP's corporate applications? Mounting evidence points to yes. Reports by Evans Data Corp., which does annual surveys of the activities of software developers, show Java use is slipping as LAMP and Microsoft's .NET technology gain traction."

4 of 923 comments (clear)

  1. Re:.NET?!? by ThinkFr33ly · · Score: 5, Informative

    Can someone explain to me how .NET is so fundamentally different from Java that it could escape Java's fate?

    Well, I'm not sure what Java's fate is, but while .NET isn't fundamentally different than Java, it has several big differences.

    As far as the CLR vs the Java runtime goes, Java byte code is fairly specific to java. It's possible to create non-Java languages that target the byte code, but it's not particularly practical. The CLR, on the other hand, was designed from the start with the idea of multiple language support.

    It may not seem like a big deal to some, but being able to write more or less equally capable code in VB.NET, C#, J#, C++, Python, or a long list of other languages really does increase adoption.

    The CLR affords far better platform specific integration than Java. JNI is complicated and horrible. COM Interop and API invocation in .NET is fairly easy and straight forward. This is important for adoption considering the huge amount of legacy code that often needs to be interop'd with.

    The security framework built into .NET (Code Access Security) is arguably more refined and capable than the model built into Java. This doesn't really affect the current generation of applications, but for the v2.0 generation it will be very important due to ClickOnce deployment.

    The CLR has support better support for a variety of programming constucts, such as generics, than Java does... or, in some cases did but the latest and greatest java releases have done a pretty good job and matching .NET's language feature set.

    While both .NET and Java are free, the application servers they run on are not. For ASP.NET, IIS is the application server. For Java/J2EE, it could be Web Sphere or a variety of others. In pretty much every case a Windows license will be a lot cheaper than the license for the J2EE app server... especially Web Sphere.

    As far as language comparison goes, it's not really all that useful since the CLR supports pretty much everything you could think of, including a nearly 1 to 1 copy of Java. (J#). But if we must, here is a great, although some what dated, comparison of Java and C#.

    Isn't .NET (C# really) just a Java rip-off?

    Not really. It's an evolutionary step. They certainly looked at Java, but they looked at everything. Managed runtimes were not invented by Sun. They've been around for 30 years. Microsoft creating .NET is a step toward Windows having a 100% managed API... something that's good for everybody. 10 years from now it will be rare to see an unmanaged application on Windows, aside from some niche areas. Java could never have done that because Sun wasn't in the position Microsoft is in.

  2. Stats Don't Lie! Java OWNS the current market! by TheTiminator · · Score: 5, Informative

    I've been watching the local So. California programming job market for a while. And as of earlier this year, I started keeping track of the number of jobs available for specific programming languages. Throughout the past 9 months, Java has owned the market on number of available programming job.

    Here's the spreadsheet that I put together. It's in no way scientific, but it is a good indicator that Java, C++, and Oracle own the programming jobs market.

    http://www.timothytrimble.info/ForSlashDot.htm

    If you don't believe me, then do the stats yourself. Go to HotJobs, Monster, Dice, CareerBuilder and find out for yourself. The stats don't lie!

    Timothy Trimble The ART of Software Development

    --
    TheTiminator
  3. Re:.NET?!? by rhedin · · Score: 5, Informative
    I can accept most of your points except:
    While both .NET and Java are free, the application servers they run on are not. For ASP.NET, IIS is the application server. For Java/J2EE, it could be Web Sphere or a variety of others. In pretty much every case a Windows license will be a lot cheaper than the license for the J2EE app server... especially Web Sphere.
    It is possible that WebSphere, WebLogic, and the like may cost more than the .NET equiv (not sure as I've not priced MS lately), but that does not consider: That are completely free of charge to both develop and deploy for production use. Support is also available if you'd like-- both free via the web and for-pay for each of these.

    Many of your points may be correct, but a price comparison is not necessarily one of them.

    rob.
  4. Re:The real 90s versus outdated 00s software by aftermath09 · · Score: 5, Informative

    have to agree with Mr. Decaff there. Garbage collection has gotten more advanced using things such as incremental GC. Also, specialized VMs such as from bea (look for JRockit) use advanced techniques such as multiple GCs.

    Also the article mentions:

    For one, many of the now-large companies built from the ground up to operate on the Internet don't make Java a major piece of their tech strategy. Those include Google (GOOG) and Yahoo! (YHOO).

    In this article, Li Moore (software engineer at Google) says: "Google makes extensive use of the Java platform. Large parts of popular Google products are written in Java. We also use Java in many internal systems and products under development." So, this would seem to be entirely untrue in Google. I wish people would do a bit of research, instead of speculate/lie (which are, of course, easier to do).

    Finally, I notice that the author of the article asks Peter Yared and Marc Andreessen their opinion. What sort of answer would one expect from the CEO and chairman (respectively) of competing technology companies? Naturally, they would champion their own technology and bash a competitor. I certainly would if I were in their shoes!