Hey
James Cook wrote:
> more damaging, technical fallacies raised by Roger's article. Rickard
> touched upon a few, and I hope that Anne Thomas will be able to do the
> rebuttal justice.
Yep, me too. I have a feeling she will too :-)
> EntityBean's performance. I'm not sure that Rickard can summarily dismiss
> this fact.
Did you mean to say "Roger" here? 'Cause I wont dismiss that I dismissed
Rogers claim. If you see what I mean. ;-)
Anyway, the interesting thing is though that he *has* done this. It has
come to my attention that most of the flaws in this article that I
pointed out had already been pointed out by others *prior* to the
release. It seems they were totally ignored.
I'm not sure about the definition of "compulsive liar", but this is
close. Even though he has been fed the truth he simply will not tell it.
This works very well in kindergarten, but as a professional technical
person it don't cut it IMHO. How can anyone (including MS people) trust
this guy? He is doing everyone a disfavor by not telling the truth.
COM-people who want to shine when discussing EJB with EJB'ers will
become very embarrassed if they try to quote him.
> in JDJ, Java Report, Java Pro, JavaWorld, etc...pick one. The average
> developer needs a development quality (freely available) EJB server to
> play/test/learn with. This doesn't exist now.
This will soon change, at least with the reference implementation coming
this fall. I'm not sure about the licensing, but I for one is really
looking forward to it.
> <slightly off-topic>
> If BEA/WebLogic would lift the 30-day trial on their server, I believe that
> this momentum will continue. I don't want to bankrupt BEA, but I don't
> believe that this will hurt BEA's (or anyone elses) bottom line, especially
> if connectivity limits were still in place. Remove the 30-day "trial"
> license to encourage more people (including students) to use your product
> and more people *will* use your product. I think the reason RMI took off so
> well was the availability of a reference implementation from Sun. I have
> heard rumors of a reference implementation of EJB from Sun, but I don't
> think we'll see it any time soon.
I think a plain-and-simple RI from Sun, and with some attention to
easy-of-use, would be equally beneficial. Using the WebLogic server can
be somewhat daunting to the uninitiated.
> If Roger's readers blindly accept his propoganda, then we (as Java
> developers/EJB supporters) have done a poor job at getting our message out.
> This message must not stoop to the same snobbish assertions applied by Roger
> Sessions, but rather, be factual, understandable, and indisputable.
Yep. We definitely need more docs on EJB: articles, whitepapers,
tutorials, books, tools, etc. The lot. And we're slowly getting there.
> PS. Maybe I should of used <soapbox></soapbox> around the whole thing!?
> Sorry, I got carried away!
Nah, you did fine ;-)
/Rickard
--
Rickard �berg
@home: +46 13 177937
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Homepage: http://www-und.ida.liu.se/~ricob684
===========================================================================
To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body
of the message "signoff EJB-INTEREST". For general help, send email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help".
