How is .NET weak in the middle and back end? I tried to make a list:
Transactional objects _must_ be stateless. DB must be one of: SQL Server, Oracle, Sybase(no DTC 2PC support). But that's about it; and since many developers *prefer* it this way(they rather have everything stateless), I wonder if it is weak. Maybe it's a matter of comfort and experience? More and more I hear that(in the scope of why J2EE failed this paper): A) J2EE and .NET are different. B) Entity Beans and JDO slow down implementations. Regarding J2EE and .NET being different, well, of course they are, but basically, they're n-tiered transactional servers(some form of 2PC implementation available). They support components based on message queues. They manage object lifetime to improve performance. They both have a Web scripting language of choice to create web pages(JSP and ASP). They both run on a VM, which potentially enables both to run on different hardware/OS platforms. They're different, but differences are subtle. The fact that J2EE has been till now easier for me to work with doesn't mean I won't switch to .Net if required, or if it makes my life simpler. Now, the constant noise regarding Entity Beans and JDO doesn't bother me anymore, but I wonder: Do all people disregard complex persistence because: They've had a bad experience in the past? (and if so, aren't they open to change?) They just can't learn Entity Beans? (really? It ain't rocket science) They just don't want to learn a new technology? (kool, mo' money for me). I'd love to hear any comments on this. Juan Pablo Lorandi Chief Software Architect Code Foundry Ltd. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Barberstown, Straffan, Co. Kildare, Ireland. Tel: +353-1-6012050 Fax: +353-1-6012051 Mobile: +353-86-2157900 www.codefoundry.com > -----Original Message----- > From: John Harby [mailto:jmh_inc@;hotmail.com] > Sent: Friday, November 01, 2002 7:45 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Huge row about J2EE vs .NET > > > I had the good fortune to work at HP with someone whom you > could call the inventor of web services, Rajiv Gupta (see > link) so I have been well schooled on this argument. > (http://www.hpl.hp.com/news/2001/apr-jun/3gupta.html) > > The primary architecture of web services (as in .Net) is an > *internet* model. Almost anything that is done is an internet > call, this is the point - you discover services over the > internet and invoke them. The traditional J2EE architecture > is that of an *intranet* model, there may > be a browser interface but most calls and transactions are > occuring via > intranet calls. Of course you can lump Java web services into > J2EE but these benchmarks never do that. > > The bottom line to me is that these .Net vs. J2EE comparisons > are useless - it's apples and oranges. I am obviously a big > fan of web services but I really don't see much "enterprise" > yet in .Net. It's typical MS, great tools, good client > development but weak in the middle & > backend. I also think that resolution of 2-phase commit and > security will be > very difficult in web services - HP had a way but it was very > complex and > didn't scale. I think J2EE cores with web service interfaces > make the most > sense which is the way we are going in the JCP. > > Just my .02, > John Harby > > > > >From: Juan Pablo Lorandi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Reply-To: Juan Pablo Lorandi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Subject: Huge row about J2EE vs .NET > >Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2002 18:08:47 -0000 > > > >The original article: > > <http://www.middleware-company.com/j2eedotnetbench/> > >http://www.middleware-company.com/j2eedotnetbench/ > > > >The analisys on the benchmark by Rickard Oberg. > > <http://dreambean.com/petstore.html> > >http://dreambean.com/petstore.html > > > >Comments? > > > >Juan Pablo Lorandi > >Chief Software Architect > >Code Foundry Ltd. > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > >Barberstown, Straffan, Co. Kildare, Ireland. > >Tel: +353-1-6012050 Fax: +353-1-6012051 > >Mobile: +353-86-2157900 > >www.codefoundry.com <http://www.codefoundry.com/> > > > >Disclaimer: > > > >Opinions expressed are entirely personal and bear no relevance to > >opinions held by my employer. Code Foundry Ltd.'s opinion is that I > >should get back to work. > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > Get faster connections�-- switch to�MSN Internet Access! > http://resourcecenter.msn.com/access/plans/default.asp > > ==========================================================================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".
