Professional developers keep their toolbox full with all sorts of libraries, patterns and practices. You'll find that we choose our tools for a number of different reasons. VB.net, just one of a dozen languages for programming.Net, is the likely the choice of someone already fluent in VB. I will choose Struts for most web development because my toolset and my brain is geared up for it. Like everything else, it seems difficult only until you become more familiar. XP needs to be taken in parts. Nothing new, there is a lot of practical genius there that we have been doing for decades. It's just been codified and named. Just pick and choose the ideas that work in your environment. XP is definitely worth a look, even if you never implement the whole thing. Software development is a craft, not a specific process or procedure. No one ever said any one tool is a must for all applications. I really don't see the point of this article. Too many incorrect characterizations for my taste. Leave the editorials to those with more experience. Besides, who is hyping these things other than their creators. The authors are trying scare people away from quality options based on anecdotes of poor use. It's irresponsible.
Server side graphics are a sure way to bog down a web server fast.
Frankly, this a silly question to anyone who knows how to write java applets. They are not slow. You may have require the user to download a recent jre. But aside from the jre download, applets are ideal for this and many other client side code. Do youself a favor and learn how to do them right and you'll be developing much richer portable apps for a long time to come.
I am speaking from experience. Don't let people talk you out of java applets or applications. See for youself. They really do work very well.
I'm concerned that standards bodies don't focus more on specific problem domains. W3C, Oasis and WS-I seem to overlap or mesh in disturbing ways. It really should be very clear as to which body we look to for specific technologies, ie. markup, rendering, communicaton, etc. The only reason MS and IBM wouldn't stay and fight for influence on the standard is that they don't respect W3C authority on the technology. Competing standards stall growth and create a huge waste of effort where as strong standards pave the way for remarkable advances.
Slashdot Mirror
Professional developers keep their toolbox full with all sorts of libraries, patterns and practices. You'll find that we choose our tools for a number of different reasons. VB.net, just one of a dozen languages for programming .Net, is the likely the choice of someone already fluent in VB. I will choose Struts for most web development because my toolset and my brain is geared up for it. Like everything else, it seems difficult only until you become more familiar. XP needs to be taken in parts. Nothing new, there is a lot of practical genius there that we have been doing for decades. It's just been codified and named. Just pick and choose the ideas that work in your environment. XP is definitely worth a look, even if you never implement the whole thing. Software development is a craft, not a specific process or procedure. No one ever said any one tool is a must for all applications. I really don't see the point of this article. Too many incorrect characterizations for my taste. Leave the editorials to those with more experience. Besides, who is hyping these things other than their creators. The authors are trying scare people away from quality options based on anecdotes of poor use. It's irresponsible.
Server side graphics are a sure way to bog down a web server fast.
Frankly, this a silly question to anyone who knows how to write java applets. They are not slow. You may have require the user to download a recent jre. But aside from the jre download, applets are ideal for this and many other client side code. Do youself a favor and learn how to do them right and you'll be developing much richer portable apps for a long time to come.
I am speaking from experience. Don't let people talk you out of java applets or applications. See for youself. They really do work very well.
I'm concerned that standards bodies don't focus more on specific problem domains. W3C, Oasis and WS-I seem to overlap or mesh in disturbing ways. It really should be very clear as to which body we look to for specific technologies, ie. markup, rendering, communicaton, etc. The only reason MS and IBM wouldn't stay and fight for influence on the standard is that they don't respect W3C authority on the technology. Competing standards stall growth and create a huge waste of effort where as strong standards pave the way for remarkable advances.