That's part of the problem. Consistency between applications in a windowing system is a great boon to the casual user...
I have never believed this. It is just a developer's myth. Users usually haven't the slightest problem determining what a button or menu is, no matter what the GUI.
Anyway, if consistency is a major advantage, why to Microsoft keep changing looks and feels so much>
IIRC Swing has been around way longer than.NET, and that's probably why you see so many more postings.
My prediction: 2006 or perhaps 2007 will be the year that.NET overtakes Java in terms of new development.
These show a misunderstanding of what is happening. Swing has only just taken off on the desktop because it was truly awful in terms of speed and looks more than a couple of years ago: No-one was seriously using Swing before that.
Secondly, there has been mention of.NET overtaking Java for a long time. But this is meaningless as they are largely used for different things -.NET as an upgrade for the existing (and pretty saturated) VB6 and VC++ Windows development and Java for Server Side development. Most large companies use.NET and Java together.
Correction, Swing requires MANY MORE PEOPLE to build than WinForms
Don't be silly. A Swing interface can be done in a few seconds using a GUI designer like NetBeans. This has to be one of the worst attempt to justify an argument I have ever read on Slashdot!
I know Java is supposed to be fast but reality is that it sucks on that front.
Why not try a recent version? Things have changed hugely. It really is worth looking at an application like say, JEdit, under Java 1.5 before commenting.
I see your point about atomicity but why do the engines in MySQL which don't offer ACID guarantees matter? Just don't pick one of those if you need that capability.
To me it matters because of the general culture around MySQL - it had a sort of 'quick and dirty' approach for years where things like modern SQL support and atomicity where initially not considered important, and then retro-fitted later. No matter how good this retro-fitting is, I personally feel more comfortable with a product like PostgreSQL, where the quality and integrity of data was a primary consideration from the start.
However, this has little relevance to your organisation, as your needs are complex, and I can see how the different capabilities of MySQL can be useful - as with your point about the different engines.
While it'd be nice to say that all of those languages are equally supported on Java, they aren't. Java is the primary language on the JVM; most documentation is for Java only; and functionality, performance, etc. with non-Java languages varies.
The support depends on the vendor - there are many vendors for non-Java languages on the JVM. Naturally, support will vary.
Still, when someone says a product works with.NET, it's safe to assume that it's supported with at least VB.NET and C#, whereas most Java products are supported with Java as the language only.
Java is a different culture than.NET. You can get support for a range of languages on the JVM - but not from Sun. You can get them from a variety of source. For example, language support in different Java IDEs is broad (especially Eclipse).
And what about mixing and matching data structures between those languages? Thought not... that's why.net is vastly superior.
Of course you can mix and match data structures between these languages.
It's not just about a shitty byte code that was designed only to run with one langauge... it's a much richer environment. Making other languages run on the JVM is like jogging in high heels - you can do it, but you'd be better off with a pair of trainers.
Utter nonsense..NET CLR is not that much different from the JVM - it designed for procedural/OOP languages like Java/C#/VB.NET. Other languages can struggle to get good performance on it.
however, you are beginning to now see another push to split java into an open source version and a sun version. so, sun will have to do something again.
Why? It does not matter whether or not there are open source versions of Java. What matters is whether they pass the compatibility tests, so they can be labelled 'Java'. Sun have stated that they are entirely happy with this. There are many open source implementations of Java APIs that have passed such tests - indeed many of the reference versions of these APIs are open source!
yes, but EJB was designed by a committee and turned out to be a complete misfire... people have used it because they were told that it was the right thing to do however, in doing so, they have suffered serious productivity losses
Yes, like the most successful site on the net - EBay - which is based almost entirely on J2EE/EJB.
if you notice,.net does not have an equivalent to EJB - just doesn't exist why is this? IT REALLY IS AN UNNECESSARY TECHNOLOGY! for many reasons.... and if you look at EJB 3.0, it is so completely different than EJB 2.0, it would be hard to compare them
You are confusing two things. EJB (Enterprise Java Beans) and Entity Beans (or to be very specific - container managed persistence of Entity Beans).
Most of EJB has been very successful and popular - Message Beans, Stateless Session Beans.
Contrary to what you say,.NET DOES have equivalents to these.
What has been a problem, both in terms of performance and complexity is Entity Beans - the object relational mapping (ORM)..NET has no equivalent - this is one of the most difficult things to implement.
EJB 3.0 differs mainly from previous versions in the way it handles ORM. There is a new, very simple, version based on well-established Java technologies used successfully by hundreds of thousands of developers - Hibernate, TopLink and JDO.
this is NOT a troll - i know this for a fact, have spoken to them, and have heard them admit it was a mistake.
Entity Beans as implemented up to EJB 2.1 were probably a mistake - they are the only part of EJB that EBay doesn't use.
as you can tell, i have an issue with EJB or any crap technology 'standard' that is delivered to the general public as the right thing to do.
Fortunately, Java is about choices. EJB 3.0 ORM is based on the choices that the public (the developers) have already made.
However, to claim that all of EJB is flawed is to misunderstand and misrepresent things - it has in general been highly successful.
.NET is not just about enterprise datacenter, but mainly about the next generation of client software..NET has had little impact in the 'enterprise datacenter'. The only place where it is truly successful is client software..NET is at the core of the windows vista API. So in order for sun to compete with.NET, they would have to improve the client side support, e.g. Swing.
Sun aren't just competing with.NET - in terms of client side GUI, Swing is now more widely used than WinForms - check any job site.
Benchmarks say that MyISAM is faster for parts benchmark load if transactions aren't needed, particularly for truly random read only access, but I'm not so sure in the real world, where you're able to design based on knowing the properties of the engines and can exploit them instead of having fixed schemas.
But this is what I don't understand - why bother with a database where you have to design knowing the properties of the different engines (e.g. InnoDB)? Why not just use one like PostgreSQL where you know you are going to get performance and reliability without this sort of tuning?
If your power goes out (as it will for everyone, if only due to emergency power off switch activation in a data center) then I hope you have a replication slave in a location on a completely different power supply, like a different state or country, because power outages have spanned many states and most of countries.
This issue isn't what I was talking about. I was talking about a database having atomic operations so that if there are power outages then the database is in a consistent state on recovery. Some table types in MySQL don't have this. PostgreSQL does.
For example, VB programmer may with some training be able to move his old VB code's business logic to.NET server.
It is not just a matter of training - VB.NET has many differences from VB.
and that way looking far ahead of Java where you can only 'plug in' with Java only.
I really don't know how people come up with statements like this. The facts could not be more different. There are more than 200 different languages than run on the JVM. A large proportion of them integrate well with Java, and can used Java classes and libraries. There are implementations of LISP, Ruby, Python, Basic, Modula, Pascal, Fortran and even COBOL. There are currently far more languages implemented on the JVM than on.NET.
For load and transactions, I'm pretty comfortable with it.
I just don't see the point. For transactional safety (and I work in a place where the mains power occasionally blows, so I really need this), we have to use InnoDB tables with MySQL. But then you lose some of the high speed advantages of MySQL. So why not just go for a products that has always had transactional safety, good performance, and better SQL support without the bother of having to select table types, like PostgreSQL? - I simply can't see the advantage.
At Wikipedia we're still concentrating on using the donations to try to keep up with the growth and that's enough strain on resources already. Not likely to get much more reliable until growth slows down and donations have a chance to catch up and start paying for reliability more than sheer capacity. Can't stop trying to grow the capacity because that would cause timeout failures in page loadings and worse apparent reliability.
My point was simply about MySQL - that there are circumstances where absolute reliability and transactional integrity is not required, and MySQL suits these situations. Personally, I would not trust it for a high-volume commercial site where transactions had to be totally guaranteed.
I was not complaining about Wikipedia as such - I think you do a great job!
Not to mention SLASHDOT, LiveJournal and Wikipedia.
I think you are confusing high volume with high reliability. No-one really cares if a post gets lost or you get a timeout or breakdown on those sites. (I regularly get error pages on Wikipedia, for example).
That was the story about Yahoo making the switch to PHP. There might be a couple large scale apps out there that are bigger than Yahoo, like Google or Wallmart. So Your assumtion is right. But for most things I imagine PHP to work OK.
There seems to be a common Slashdot belief that 'my favourite language [whatever... python/ruby/php/perl] is so powerful that it can be used for absolutely anything and those people paying for big expensive UNIX boxes and using Java are just SO silly....'. PHP scales for some things, but for other things it doesn't. This is true for any language.
Btw. I heard that Google does a lot in Python.
Yes. They also do a lot in Java, in C++, in all sorts of things....
We also have some idea, albeit an imperfect one, of how it relates to what developers in general use, precisely because of the orientation of Freshmeat to Free Software
We do? I'm not sure anyone has a good idea of the relationship of Free Software to general use.
I'm not saying this is wrong (although I suspect it overstates use of C as a general language), just that it is hard to tell.
I don't see how this is any better or worse than Dice. It simply shows what Freshmeat developers use. Who knows how that relates to developers in general?
It said devouring, not devoured... meaning it is all about dynamic grouth. Do the same query one more time in a month and then compare numbers. Ones that change faster are the ones that deserve "devouring" attribyte. Pretty sure, Python will be one of them
I like and use Python, but this just doesn't make sense. You can change as fast as you like, but unless you have significant presence, you can't seriously be said to be 'devouring' anything!
Otherwise I could declare that COBOL is devouring everything because last week I saw 3 jobs and this week I saw 10. Look at that growth!
Slashdot Mirror
That's part of the problem. Consistency between applications in a windowing system is a great boon to the casual user...
I have never believed this. It is just a developer's myth. Users usually haven't the slightest problem determining what a button or menu is, no matter what the GUI.
Anyway, if consistency is a major advantage, why to Microsoft keep changing looks and feels so much>
Thats funny because i remember Ebay blaming sun for their outtages a while back which costs ebay millions of dollars.
Firstly, that was in 1999! You are trying to make a point about modern J2EE with an example six years old!
Secondly, that has not stopped them continuing with J2EE/EJB and making billions ever since.
IIRC Swing has been around way longer than .NET, and that's probably why you see so many more postings.
.NET overtakes Java in terms of new development.
.NET overtaking Java for a long time. But this is meaningless as they are largely used for different things - .NET as an upgrade for the existing (and pretty saturated) VB6 and VC++ Windows development and Java for Server Side development. Most large companies use .NET and Java together.
My prediction: 2006 or perhaps 2007 will be the year that
These show a misunderstanding of what is happening. Swing has only just taken off on the desktop because it was truly awful in terms of speed and looks more than a couple of years ago: No-one was seriously using Swing before that.
Secondly, there has been mention of
Correction, Swing requires MANY MORE PEOPLE to build than WinForms
Don't be silly. A Swing interface can be done in a few seconds using a GUI designer like NetBeans. This has to be one of the worst attempt to justify an argument I have ever read on Slashdot!
I know Java is supposed to be fast but reality is that it sucks on that front.
Why not try a recent version? Things have changed hugely. It really is worth looking at an application like say, JEdit, under Java 1.5 before commenting.
I see your point about atomicity but why do the engines in MySQL which don't offer ACID guarantees matter? Just don't pick one of those if you need that capability.
To me it matters because of the general culture around MySQL - it had a sort of 'quick and dirty' approach for years where things like modern SQL support and atomicity where initially not considered important, and then retro-fitted later. No matter how good this retro-fitting is, I personally feel more comfortable with a product like PostgreSQL, where the quality and integrity of data was a primary consideration from the start.
However, this has little relevance to your organisation, as your needs are complex, and I can see how the different capabilities of MySQL can be useful - as with your point about the different engines.
While it'd be nice to say that all of those languages are equally supported on Java, they aren't. Java is the primary language on the JVM; most documentation is for Java only; and functionality, performance, etc. with non-Java languages varies.
.NET, it's safe to assume that it's supported with at least VB.NET and C#, whereas most Java products are supported with Java as the language only.
.NET. You can get support for a range of languages on the JVM - but not from Sun. You can get them from a variety of source. For example, language support in different Java IDEs is broad (especially Eclipse).
The support depends on the vendor - there are many vendors for non-Java languages on the JVM. Naturally, support will vary.
Still, when someone says a product works with
Java is a different culture than
And what about mixing and matching data structures between those languages? Thought not... that's why .net is vastly superior.
.NET CLR is not that much different from the JVM - it designed for procedural/OOP languages like Java/C#/VB.NET. Other languages can struggle to get good performance on it.
Of course you can mix and match data structures between these languages.
It's not just about a shitty byte code that was designed only to run with one langauge... it's a much richer environment. Making other languages run on the JVM is like jogging in high heels - you can do it, but you'd be better off with a pair of trainers.
Utter nonsense.
Swing is terribly ugly and slow.
Just FUD. Swing is whatever you want it to look like - the look and feel is pluggable. As for slow, it is OpenGL and DirectX accelerated.
however, you are beginning to now see another push to split java into an open source version and a sun version.
so, sun will have to do something again.
Why? It does not matter whether or not there are open source versions of Java. What matters is whether they pass the compatibility tests, so they can be labelled 'Java'. Sun have stated that they are entirely happy with this. There are many open source implementations of Java APIs that have passed such tests - indeed many of the reference versions of these APIs are open source!
yes, but EJB was designed by a committee and turned out to be a complete misfire ...
.net does not have an equivalent to EJB - just doesn't exist ....
.NET DOES have equivalents to these.
.NET has no equivalent - this is one of the most difficult things to implement.
people have used it because they were told that it was the right thing to do
however, in doing so, they have suffered serious productivity losses
Yes, like the most successful site on the net - EBay - which is based almost entirely on J2EE/EJB.
if you notice,
why is this? IT REALLY IS AN UNNECESSARY TECHNOLOGY! for many reasons
and if you look at EJB 3.0, it is so completely different than EJB 2.0, it would be hard to compare them
You are confusing two things. EJB (Enterprise Java Beans) and Entity Beans (or to be very specific - container managed persistence of Entity Beans).
Most of EJB has been very successful and popular - Message Beans, Stateless Session Beans.
Contrary to what you say,
What has been a problem, both in terms of performance and complexity is Entity Beans - the object relational mapping (ORM).
EJB 3.0 differs mainly from previous versions in the way it handles ORM. There is a new, very simple, version based on well-established Java technologies used successfully by hundreds of thousands of developers - Hibernate, TopLink and JDO.
this is NOT a troll - i know this for a fact, have spoken to them,
and have heard them admit it was a mistake.
Entity Beans as implemented up to EJB 2.1 were probably a mistake - they are the only part of EJB that EBay doesn't use.
as you can tell, i have an issue with EJB or any crap technology 'standard' that is delivered to the general public as the right thing to do.
Fortunately, Java is about choices. EJB 3.0 ORM is based on the choices that the public (the developers) have already made.
However, to claim that all of EJB is flawed is to misunderstand and misrepresent things - it has in general been highly successful.
Even in software industry. If SUN feils somebody will do it somewhere, look what happeneds with Ruby on Rails?
Yes, and what has happened with Ruby on Rails? Actually, very little so far. A lot of hype and noise.
.NET is not just about enterprise datacenter, but mainly about the next generation of client software. .NET has had little impact in the 'enterprise datacenter'. The only place where it is truly successful is client software. .NET is at the core of the windows vista API. So in order for sun to compete with .NET, they would have to improve the client side support, e.g. Swing.
.NET - in terms of client side GUI, Swing is now more widely used than WinForms - check any job site.
Sun aren't just competing with
Benchmarks say that MyISAM is faster for parts benchmark load if transactions aren't needed, particularly for truly random read only access, but I'm not so sure in the real world, where you're able to design based on knowing the properties of the engines and can exploit them instead of having fixed schemas.
But this is what I don't understand - why bother with a database where you have to design knowing the properties of the different engines (e.g. InnoDB)? Why not just use one like PostgreSQL where you know you are going to get performance and reliability without this sort of tuning?
If your power goes out (as it will for
everyone, if only due to emergency power off switch activation in a data center) then I hope you have a replication slave in a location on a completely different power supply, like a different state or country, because power outages have spanned many states and most of countries.
This issue isn't what I was talking about. I was talking about a database having atomic operations so that if there are power outages then the database is in a consistent state on recovery. Some table types in MySQL don't have this. PostgreSQL does.
For example, VB programmer may with some training be able to move his old VB code's business logic to .NET server.
.NET.
It is not just a matter of training - VB.NET has many differences from VB.
and that way looking far ahead of Java where you can only 'plug in' with Java only.
I really don't know how people come up with statements like this. The facts could not be more different. There are more than 200 different languages than run on the JVM. A large proportion of them integrate well with Java, and can used Java classes and libraries. There are implementations of LISP, Ruby, Python, Basic, Modula, Pascal, Fortran and even COBOL. There are currently far more languages implemented on the JVM than on
For load and transactions, I'm pretty comfortable with it.
I just don't see the point. For transactional safety (and I work in a place where the mains power occasionally blows, so I really need this), we have to use InnoDB tables with MySQL. But then you lose some of the high speed advantages of MySQL. So why not just go for a products that has always had transactional safety, good performance, and better SQL support without the bother of having to select table types, like PostgreSQL? - I simply can't see the advantage.
At Wikipedia we're still concentrating on using the donations to try to keep up with the growth and that's enough strain on resources already. Not likely to get much more reliable until growth slows down and donations have a chance to catch up and start paying for reliability more than sheer capacity. Can't stop trying to grow the capacity because that would cause timeout failures in page loadings and worse apparent reliability.
My point was simply about MySQL - that there are circumstances where absolute reliability and transactional integrity is not required, and MySQL suits these situations. Personally, I would not trust it for a high-volume commercial site where transactions had to be totally guaranteed.
I was not complaining about Wikipedia as such - I think you do a great job!
Not to mention SLASHDOT, LiveJournal and Wikipedia.
I think you are confusing high volume with high reliability. No-one really cares if a post gets lost or you get a timeout or breakdown on those sites. (I regularly get error pages on Wikipedia, for example).
Java has way too much marketing, so its rank is almost certainly higher than it should have been.
Ah, right. Because the only possible reason that all those developers use Java is because of marketing. We are all just so gullible.
Talk about being condescending to others who don't share your opinion of languages!
"PHP scales for everything...."
1 0/29/2052239
http://developers.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/
That was the story about Yahoo making the switch to PHP. There might be a couple large scale apps out there that are bigger than Yahoo, like Google or Wallmart. So Your assumtion is right. But for most things I imagine PHP to work OK.
There seems to be a common Slashdot belief that 'my favourite language [whatever... python/ruby/php/perl] is so powerful that it can be used for absolutely anything and those people paying for big expensive UNIX boxes and using Java are just SO silly....'. PHP scales for some things, but for other things it doesn't. This is true for any language.
Btw. I heard that Google does a lot in Python.
Yes. They also do a lot in Java, in C++, in all sorts of things....
We also have some idea, albeit an imperfect one, of how it relates to what developers in general use, precisely because of the orientation of Freshmeat to Free Software
We do? I'm not sure anyone has a good idea of the relationship of Free Software to general use.
I'm not saying this is wrong (although I suspect it overstates use of C as a general language), just that it is hard to tell.
OK - how about this?
http://www.tiobe.com/tpci.htm
Seems reasonable to me - shows Python has significant popularity.
I don't see how this is any better or worse than Dice. It simply shows what Freshmeat developers use. Who knows how that relates to developers in general?
Python is better than Perl, but in terms of devouring? Its like saying that American Football is devouring other sports around the world.
You are forgetting that this is the Slashdot Universe, where...
"Java/Intel/Oracle/Sun/Windows is dying..."
"No-one uses commercial UNIX..."
"Open Source is GPL and anything else is evil.."
"PHP scales for everything...."
and...
"Favourite open-source language [fill in the blank] is the future and everyone is already using it...."
When in this Slashdot dimension, you have to understand the rules!
It said devouring, not devoured ... meaning it is all
about dynamic grouth.
Do the same query one more time in a month and then
compare numbers. Ones that change faster are the ones
that deserve "devouring" attribyte.
Pretty sure, Python will be one of them
I like and use Python, but this just doesn't make sense. You can change as fast as you like, but unless you have significant presence, you can't seriously be said to be 'devouring' anything!
Otherwise I could declare that COBOL is devouring everything because last week I saw 3 jobs and this week I saw 10. Look at that growth!