This is similar to Java DAO and to an extent EJB though EJB's have a lot more complexity due to being remotely accessible. You can wrap EJB's in a DAO framework.
While DAO isn't dynamic, there are a good number of DAO generators that will build your classes and interfaces based on your database schema. Then your database access becomes pretty simple. You call up your daofactory to get the sepcific dao object then make the calls to it just as in your example.
I wrote a dao generator for some projects that create a jdbc implementation for postgresql. It's been a big time saver.
All this is, is a framework for accessing a database. There are similar frameworks for Java, like Hybernate. They are just not part of the Java spec.
Good OO design really makes DB access simple. Most well written projects only have one class that actually has jdbc specific code. All other classes that handle the business logic will subclass or call this class.
There are tons of open source projects out there. There were tons of openn source projects before linux existed and will be around long after linux is dead.
Why do so many of you *#$&(## think that open source is all about linux and how everthing open source has to benefit linux? It's the most disgusting type of attitude I see here and the most harmful to oss.
You can't avoid lens flare if you're pointing your lens into the sun. You can minimize it in some instances though. Most of the time's i've seen it in animated movies, it made sense to have it because a real lens would have had it too.
"My other issue is that the Java Standard Widget Toolkit(SWT) has not been ported to XP64(nor to the devs seem to have a plan to do so at the moment) which means no Eclipse or Azureus in spite of the whole write-once, run-anywhere Java mentality"
Regardless of wheter the word "Standard" is in the name, SWT is not part of the java spec, it is a third party toolkit. Sun has been bitching about SWT because it is not pure java (it relies on a lot of native hooks) and breaks the write once run anywhere theme of java.
If it was a swing app instead of swt, then you wouldn't have a problem since Sun has their jre ported to the os. You mention Sun and Java but the real people to blame for this not working are either IBM or the open source developers that develop swt.
Back before J2EE became popular this is what a lot of application servers did. Usually connecting via ISAPI or NSAPI or sometimes cgi.
I don't remember the names of all the different ones I evaluated but we wound up using Bluestone Sapphire/Web. You would create application servers that would run on your web server or on other boxes that your webserver would talk to. The web server would connect to an application server instance that ran continually.
Sapphire/Web was a really good development tool. There were a lot of great tools that helped you build applications really fast that would connect to all sorts of data sources.
Then J2EE came around and all the application server vendors started switching to that. Most vendors started focussing on the server technology and their development tools weren't as rich and easy to use as they were before. All that effort that went into the original tools was lost. It's taken years for the tools to catch back up to where they were before the J2EE switch. Some of the things the tools started using, like EJB's, weren't as fast as the previous business logic members but better tools could be written for something like EJB's as opposed to regular JDBC logic classes. Things like Sun's Sun ONE developer tool did some nice things with the MVC framework as well as other tool vendors but with all the levels of abstraction and the necesity of using so much reflection, things were a bit slow.
J2EE was supposed to level off the application server playing field and vendors were supposed to compete on their tools for designing solutions for the J2EE app servers. So it seems odd to me that the tools seemed to have taken a big hit when going to J2EE.
$1,000? That's small enough for a small claims court. Things are a bit easier in small claims court. Imagine the impact of a million small claims court cases vs one large class action lawsuit where the only one that wins are the attorneys.
I don't know about other countires, but for calls to greece, canada and long distance within the US I've been very happy with the rates from World-Link. Their rates are very good and I don't have to worry about buying special equipment. The few times I've had to call customer service the experience as been quiet good.
I think world-link is greek owned. It was nice when my parents wanted to sign up and they were able to do so in their native language.
Found them after AT&T royally screwed me with a promotion I signed up for which they cancelled 2 days later resulting in a multi hundred dollar bill. They never informed me about the change so international calls were billed at about $3/minute as opposed to a few cents.
"Well according to stallman, even if a program is completely useful to you but is proprietary, he won't use it."
Well he should hope that he dosen't ever get really really sick. Because the software that runs all those devices surely isn't free. Some are even very expensive commercial packages that run on windows even.
Somehow I don't picture him stopping the emt's and requiring them to take apart and explain how the defibrilator was put together when they're running towards him with it.
To Jem's credit he did seem to thoroughly trash Sun's JDS in his review. He seemed to be glowing more about Solaris 10 than he did about JDS. Not saying he's right on either account but he doesn't seem to be that biased.
"Hmmm, I'm pretty sure that if that quote came from some executive at a Redmond-based company, the reactions would be outrageous. What ever happened to the concept of looking at your neighbours what they're doing better than you, instead of isolating your own development ?"
That's odd... If you look at the kernel mailing list you see a whole bunch of references of developers asking how solaris did this or that. A lot of times they even knew the details of how solaris did a certain thing. I don't remember Linus saying anything like that directly. The comment just seems odd considering how much interest linux developers had in solaris and how much they even knew about the solaris internals even before solaris was officially open.
I would think they would be eager to take a look. Solaris seems to be mentioned a lot more than many of the other unixes.
Don't you find it disgusting that Lotus Notes client is one of the top 25 voted for apps? IBM makes millions if not billions off of Linux, yet when it comes to porting what they claim to be the market leader in enterprise email and collaboration they do nothing? WTF!?!?! Granted, the Notes client sucks right now compared to the main usability features you get in MS Outlook right now. But you'd think that getting a good workgroup app for linux would be an important step for getting desktop linux running. Though IBM may not be concerned with linux on the desktop or desktops in general for that matter anymore.
"Sure we dont get paid, but we do love what we do. The whole satisfaction bit comes from the sense of accomplishement and contribution to a greater good."
The greater good seems to buying mansions for resellers or at least shiney new cars. So you work for free o something that other people make money off of. I need to find some people interested i the greater good of my lawn care.
"So, not only are they counting the hardware that linux is running on as being "spent on linux," they're also counting existing hardware on which linux will be installed as being "spent" on linux as well"
I don't know what's sadder. That you misread the quote and posted such a misinformed statement, or that 4 people decided to moderate you up and nobody that replied seems to be able to read the statement any better.
Lets look at the quote from the article:
The numbers are higher than earlier estimates by most analysts, in part, said IDC, because it changed it methodology to account for not just Linux on new hardware, but also Linux that's redeployed on existing hardware, and even cases when the open-source OS is used as a guest operating system, such as in a server partitioned with virtualization software to run multiple OSes.
For all you people out there with the reading comprehension of a 4 year old.. let me explain what it says. It says that the original estimate only calculated the money spent on linux when it is bought for new hardware. Now they're also counting the amount they think will be spent on linux when linux is installed on existing hardware. THEY ARE NOT COUNTING THE COST OF THE HARDWARE AS YOU SEEM TO THINK!
Let me give you an example since you couldn't figure it out by reading it the first time. If you buy 5 new servers for 3k each and you spend $300 dollars for linux for those servers, you've spent $1500 for linux. Now lets say you also had 10 old servers that you are migrating from AIX to Linux. Well then you have to account for the cost of licenses/support for those 10 servers as well which is (10x300) $3000. So your total cost for linux/support is $4500 not $1500. No where in there are you counting the cost of the hadware as being "spent on linux" as you, and a bunch of other iliterates seem to think.
Intel hasn't dropoped itanium yet but things don't look good for the chip. HP is pretty much done with it and that 3 billion they talked about continuing to put into the itanium project is most likely some sort of fee to get out of the deal with Intel. The chip developers that are now going to Intel pretty much leaves HP devoid of any engineering power to develop any type of chip other than the chips they put on their ink cartridges.
FUD means Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt. None of those words imply that the statements are false.
For all the crap Sun gets on here, they do get a lot of things right. Forcasting the demise of HP's unix commitment and it's associated platforms is a big deal. It's great that HP is moving more towards linux from HP-UX but that's not the best solution for everyone.
Right now the only two real unix providers are IBM and Sun. IBM wants to try and kill off Sun too. Some how Sun has managed to stay alive even though IBM is a much bigger company with much more resources. Sun's savior is probably Java and IBM's investment in it.
As the people that watch this all play out, we take sides and cheer them on hoping our favorites completely anhialate their competitors. It's fun to watch and talk about, almost like real sports. But in sports, the losing team always comes back next season to try again.
If one company in the tech world kills off their competitors, that's it for them and their technology. If Sun packed up and stopped making processors a few years ago, would we ever see Power4 or Power5? We might if Fujitsu took over the Sparc market in the US.
IBM seems to understand this which is why they invested so much into the Novel/SuSE deal. If Red Hat continues to lead the linux pack by such a big margin, things won't go great for linux in general. If IBM becomes the only major unix and risc player, things are going to stagnate on that level as well. If Unix ever dissapears, then Linux might not progress as fast at the same rate it is now.
I'm going to stop now... sometimes i just like to ramble.
Yeah cause people that reverse engineer software to determine the maximum weakness of the browser would never think to get a pirated copy of the tools from the vast asian black market for software that doesn't exist.
"Would the results be similar in a world-wide company with 10.000 employees located in different countries?"
A company of that scale has a bunch of problems. They most likely have a large number of custom applications. Most of these might be web based but even those might have dependancies on activex in the browser.
In addition, you have to deal with all the excel macros, lotus notes/exchange applications and forms, custom vb applications, etc.
On top of the inhouse applications, you have to deal with high priced software that may not run on linux.
When you're dealing with a smaller company you're probably not dealing with that much home brewed software so the migration, and numbers, should look better.
" Couldn't/Shouldn't Dell look into other Linux server packages?"
It's not that easy. Linux distributions vary. A lot of applications that people are buying for these servers are certified torun on RHEL and sometimes Suse's enterprise linux. Things like oracle may not run on debian.
"Now, as far as the extent of Sun's contribution to said movement is concerned, you have a point."
He may have a point but it's not necessarily valid and definately not concrete.
OSS, Free Software grew out of something. it didn't just happen. Back in the days before the FSF, people, especially in acedemia, used to share their work. BSD was around before linux and one of the Founders of Sun was a key developer in the BSD world. Which is also why the original SunOS was BSD based.
They have also released a lot of their work as open source, including making the sparc architecture an open standard that is maintained by a third party.
I know it's wrong to defend sun on here but if you don't have a long term memory problem, Schwartz isn't completely off base in his statement. Things were obviously different back in those days, especially after some of the original employees have left, but things seem to be turning around. Hopefully it works out and Sun becomes more like the company it used to be. It seems that might be the case. A lot of people would like that. It probably wouldn't be good for Red Hat if that happens. But that doesn't mean it would be a bad thing.
oh my god! you're such a freakin idiot. You're complaining that in a PR statement someone used a technically accurate reference and since it was a PR statement it should have been technically innacurate so you're twisting it around so that his meaning is technically innacurate, making it totally accurate for a PR statement and then using that to defend you're point.
On a site for techies no less!
Ok so lets hope we don't get any more technically accurate statements in PR statements because I really miss people on slashdot complaining about how wrong and misleading those statements are.
What's even worse. If you read the freakin blog. It's not even really about Linux, Red Hat or any other flavor. It's about HP's lack of commitment to their operating systems and why people should switch away from them. Saying MS Windows, Sun Solaris and Red Hat Linux are the big three players. Which isn't a totally innacurate claim in the space sun plays in.
It's absolutely disgusting that it will get twisted into Sun claiming that linux is red hat just because that's what the OSS community seems to want every one to think.
For god's sake! He's saying that people can't rely on Carly to keep their commitment to HP-UX based on everything else that has happened and that the only options are the three he listed. He listed Red Hat Linux as an option for people to use to move away from HP. This is totally blown out of proportion. I guess it's safe to say Linux is now a player in the real enterprise computing feild. They no longer just rely on geeks hacking out code, they also have their own fantasy land pr movements.
Slashdot Mirror
While DAO isn't dynamic, there are a good number of DAO generators that will build your classes and interfaces based on your database schema. Then your database access becomes pretty simple. You call up your daofactory to get the sepcific dao object then make the calls to it just as in your example.
I wrote a dao generator for some projects that create a jdbc implementation for postgresql. It's been a big time saver.
All this is, is a framework for accessing a database. There are similar frameworks for Java, like Hybernate. They are just not part of the Java spec.
Good OO design really makes DB access simple. Most well written projects only have one class that actually has jdbc specific code. All other classes that handle the business logic will subclass or call this class.
Why do so many of you *#$&(## think that open source is all about linux and how everthing open source has to benefit linux? It's the most disgusting type of attitude I see here and the most harmful to oss.
I think you hit the nail on the head.
You can't avoid lens flare if you're pointing your lens into the sun. You can minimize it in some instances though. Most of the time's i've seen it in animated movies, it made sense to have it because a real lens would have had it too.
Oh so you like German porn?
Regardless of wheter the word "Standard" is in the name, SWT is not part of the java spec, it is a third party toolkit. Sun has been bitching about SWT because it is not pure java (it relies on a lot of native hooks) and breaks the write once run anywhere theme of java.
If it was a swing app instead of swt, then you wouldn't have a problem since Sun has their jre ported to the os. You mention Sun and Java but the real people to blame for this not working are either IBM or the open source developers that develop swt.
I don't remember the names of all the different ones I evaluated but we wound up using Bluestone Sapphire/Web. You would create application servers that would run on your web server or on other boxes that your webserver would talk to. The web server would connect to an application server instance that ran continually.
Sapphire/Web was a really good development tool. There were a lot of great tools that helped you build applications really fast that would connect to all sorts of data sources.
Then J2EE came around and all the application server vendors started switching to that. Most vendors started focussing on the server technology and their development tools weren't as rich and easy to use as they were before. All that effort that went into the original tools was lost. It's taken years for the tools to catch back up to where they were before the J2EE switch. Some of the things the tools started using, like EJB's, weren't as fast as the previous business logic members but better tools could be written for something like EJB's as opposed to regular JDBC logic classes. Things like Sun's Sun ONE developer tool did some nice things with the MVC framework as well as other tool vendors but with all the levels of abstraction and the necesity of using so much reflection, things were a bit slow.
J2EE was supposed to level off the application server playing field and vendors were supposed to compete on their tools for designing solutions for the J2EE app servers. So it seems odd to me that the tools seemed to have taken a big hit when going to J2EE.
$1,000? That's small enough for a small claims court. Things are a bit easier in small claims court. Imagine the impact of a million small claims court cases vs one large class action lawsuit where the only one that wins are the attorneys.
I think world-link is greek owned. It was nice when my parents wanted to sign up and they were able to do so in their native language.
Found them after AT&T royally screwed me with a promotion I signed up for which they cancelled 2 days later resulting in a multi hundred dollar bill. They never informed me about the change so international calls were billed at about $3/minute as opposed to a few cents.
Well he should hope that he dosen't ever get really really sick. Because the software that runs all those devices surely isn't free. Some are even very expensive commercial packages that run on windows even.
Somehow I don't picture him stopping the emt's and requiring them to take apart and explain how the defibrilator was put together when they're running towards him with it.
I don't think X is part of the GNU project though the FSF has some opinions on it.
As for Y. I have no idea what that is.
To Jem's credit he did seem to thoroughly trash Sun's JDS in his review. He seemed to be glowing more about Solaris 10 than he did about JDS. Not saying he's right on either account but he doesn't seem to be that biased.
That's odd... If you look at the kernel mailing list you see a whole bunch of references of developers asking how solaris did this or that. A lot of times they even knew the details of how solaris did a certain thing. I don't remember Linus saying anything like that directly. The comment just seems odd considering how much interest linux developers had in solaris and how much they even knew about the solaris internals even before solaris was officially open.
I would think they would be eager to take a look. Solaris seems to be mentioned a lot more than many of the other unixes.
Don't you find it disgusting that Lotus Notes client is one of the top 25 voted for apps? IBM makes millions if not billions off of Linux, yet when it comes to porting what they claim to be the market leader in enterprise email and collaboration they do nothing? WTF!?!?! Granted, the Notes client sucks right now compared to the main usability features you get in MS Outlook right now. But you'd think that getting a good workgroup app for linux would be an important step for getting desktop linux running. Though IBM may not be concerned with linux on the desktop or desktops in general for that matter anymore.
The greater good seems to buying mansions for resellers or at least shiney new cars. So you work for free o something that other people make money off of. I need to find some people interested i the greater good of my lawn care.
I don't know what's sadder. That you misread the quote and posted such a misinformed statement, or that 4 people decided to moderate you up and nobody that replied seems to be able to read the statement any better.
Lets look at the quote from the article:
For all you people out there with the reading comprehension of a 4 year old.. let me explain what it says. It says that the original estimate only calculated the money spent on linux when it is bought for new hardware. Now they're also counting the amount they think will be spent on linux when linux is installed on existing hardware. THEY ARE NOT COUNTING THE COST OF THE HARDWARE AS YOU SEEM TO THINK!Let me give you an example since you couldn't figure it out by reading it the first time. If you buy 5 new servers for 3k each and you spend $300 dollars for linux for those servers, you've spent $1500 for linux. Now lets say you also had 10 old servers that you are migrating from AIX to Linux. Well then you have to account for the cost of licenses/support for those 10 servers as well which is (10x300) $3000. So your total cost for linux/support is $4500 not $1500. No where in there are you counting the cost of the hadware as being "spent on linux" as you, and a bunch of other iliterates seem to think.
In that case, let's hope the recipients of the money do the right thing.
What the hell did dog catchers ever do to you that you would lump them in the same category!?!?!?!
FUD means Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt. None of those words imply that the statements are false.
For all the crap Sun gets on here, they do get a lot of things right. Forcasting the demise of HP's unix commitment and it's associated platforms is a big deal. It's great that HP is moving more towards linux from HP-UX but that's not the best solution for everyone.
Right now the only two real unix providers are IBM and Sun. IBM wants to try and kill off Sun too. Some how Sun has managed to stay alive even though IBM is a much bigger company with much more resources. Sun's savior is probably Java and IBM's investment in it.
As the people that watch this all play out, we take sides and cheer them on hoping our favorites completely anhialate their competitors. It's fun to watch and talk about, almost like real sports. But in sports, the losing team always comes back next season to try again.
If one company in the tech world kills off their competitors, that's it for them and their technology. If Sun packed up and stopped making processors a few years ago, would we ever see Power4 or Power5? We might if Fujitsu took over the Sparc market in the US.
IBM seems to understand this which is why they invested so much into the Novel/SuSE deal. If Red Hat continues to lead the linux pack by such a big margin, things won't go great for linux in general. If IBM becomes the only major unix and risc player, things are going to stagnate on that level as well. If Unix ever dissapears, then Linux might not progress as fast at the same rate it is now.
I'm going to stop now... sometimes i just like to ramble.
Yeah cause people that reverse engineer software to determine the maximum weakness of the browser would never think to get a pirated copy of the tools from the vast asian black market for software that doesn't exist.
A company of that scale has a bunch of problems. They most likely have a large number of custom applications. Most of these might be web based but even those might have dependancies on activex in the browser.
In addition, you have to deal with all the excel macros, lotus notes/exchange applications and forms, custom vb applications, etc.
On top of the inhouse applications, you have to deal with high priced software that may not run on linux.
When you're dealing with a smaller company you're probably not dealing with that much home brewed software so the migration, and numbers, should look better.
It's not that easy. Linux distributions vary. A lot of applications that people are buying for these servers are certified torun on RHEL and sometimes Suse's enterprise linux. Things like oracle may not run on debian.
Now I know the story must have legs. I can definately see a politician or phb type asking for something like that.
He may have a point but it's not necessarily valid and definately not concrete.
OSS, Free Software grew out of something. it didn't just happen. Back in the days before the FSF, people, especially in acedemia, used to share their work. BSD was around before linux and one of the Founders of Sun was a key developer in the BSD world. Which is also why the original SunOS was BSD based.
They have also released a lot of their work as open source, including making the sparc architecture an open standard that is maintained by a third party.
I know it's wrong to defend sun on here but if you don't have a long term memory problem, Schwartz isn't completely off base in his statement. Things were obviously different back in those days, especially after some of the original employees have left, but things seem to be turning around. Hopefully it works out and Sun becomes more like the company it used to be. It seems that might be the case. A lot of people would like that. It probably wouldn't be good for Red Hat if that happens. But that doesn't mean it would be a bad thing.
On a site for techies no less!
Ok so lets hope we don't get any more technically accurate statements in PR statements because I really miss people on slashdot complaining about how wrong and misleading those statements are.
What's even worse. If you read the freakin blog. It's not even really about Linux, Red Hat or any other flavor. It's about HP's lack of commitment to their operating systems and why people should switch away from them. Saying MS Windows, Sun Solaris and Red Hat Linux are the big three players. Which isn't a totally innacurate claim in the space sun plays in.
It's absolutely disgusting that it will get twisted into Sun claiming that linux is red hat just because that's what the OSS community seems to want every one to think.
For god's sake! He's saying that people can't rely on Carly to keep their commitment to HP-UX based on everything else that has happened and that the only options are the three he listed. He listed Red Hat Linux as an option for people to use to move away from HP. This is totally blown out of proportion. I guess it's safe to say Linux is now a player in the real enterprise computing feild. They no longer just rely on geeks hacking out code, they also have their own fantasy land pr movements.