On 11 Jul., 23:53, Martin Wildam <mwil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > on the Microsoft side > > it's more top-down. In Redmond, there's an interesting arsenal of > > experts (Hejlsberg, Meijer, Hugunin etc.) who have been meeting in a > > room 3 days a week for the last decade, who try to find ways for us to > > be more productive while not melting our brain. > I think, I finally understood your viewpoint. :-)
I thought again and again about this and my result is: No matter how often they meet and how many these "experts" are. There is no guarantee that they will do a good job - even the opposite may be the case. There are plenty of constructs and features in Microsoft products that definitely miss the point (Ribbons are just one thing that comes to my mind here ;-) ). - I cannot see the big advantage of such expert groups taking decisions that might not fit well to what 80 % of the others are doing in their daily jobs. And for me the first logical step after VB was .NET - and guess what: I came to Java because I was not satisfied with .NET - it is not fitting MY needs. And my needs are not just my crazy ideas - it is what I think that results in value for the customers. > > That's easier said than done, people will always disagree on what's > > best. Servlets are just the basic foundation underneath it all, JSP > > was the first abstraction on top, then a lot of other stuff and > > currently the official standard/path is JSF. Here's where it gets > > dirty, personally I wouldn't recommend JSF to anyone except those with > > masochistic tendencies who loves XML and despise OO Java. By the sheer > > up-votes on the following link, this appears to be a shared > > sentiment:http://dzone.com/links/jsf_sucks_compendium_of_jsf_rantsreviews.html JSF might not be the best choice to get a real productivity boost over using JSP for instance. But there is such a huge amount of libraries and frameworks where either no equivalent in .NET is even in planning (if not a very big pond of information is hidden somewhere in a cavern). Maybe there is so much whining in the Java community because of the diversity that also allows comparison in performance, architecture and features. In the MS world IT admins, companies and developers usually do what Microsoft advises/suggest them to do - not seldom forcing companies to unnecessary upgrades etc (MS Office is again a product that comes to mind at this point). > > I don't think it's easy to learn practical Java in this day and age, > > just getting an overview of the many various logging facilities used > > is an art. It would be interesting to hear your experiences. > I looked at some of the logging modules but did not really use one of > those. In the first look I found things missing that I wanted to have > - and I wanted an easy solution that works in a fine way just by > default. - So I implemented my own. :-) I am quite sure that Java suffers somehow from an "uncontrolled growth" of (some) libraries and frameworks. Time will show what technologies will be more successful over others. If people worry about their ROI, I need to tell that the same happens in the Microsoft environment for example. Applications and components simply refuse to work on newer OS versions (even if it seems that the core OS is the same since many years... ;-) ) and need to be reworked and updated. Or simply Microsoft is dicontinuing support. I have developed an Outlook plugin that during development phase refused to work 2 times because of changed behavior of Outlook after some ambigous Office update. And what If I would use .NET? If I want to get the benefits of updated runtimes I need to purchase Visual Studio upgrades, isn't it? And as everybody here and there is now talking about Scala, I took a short look on it - sure, just a short look, but I cannot see the killer benefits. Apart from yet another syntax (what is really annoying for me after learning more than a dozen of languages now). I even do not see Scala being any better regarding readability. I could see that there is less code to write, yeah "def" is well short. But is this the point? In Netbeans psvm instantly expands to public static void main... and and ps to public static - so why bother? - I either tend to say that a VB like BEGIN ... END is better for readability than { and } - but I am still flexible. ;-) - This paragraph should not be a flame against Scala, there are some neat tweaks you can do - but these are no killer argument against Java. In the interview with Cay Horstmann (if I remember right) there was mentioned a problem of the students dealing with "public static void". Hey, this can't really be a problem - don't get a programmer if this already makes you suffer! I really invested a long time evaluating languages "of the future" before deciding for the favor of Java and I think there is really no reason to badmouth Java so much! Despite some historical grown mispackaging of particular functions I find Java being well designed and I am glad to see that people think well about some new features before integrating it into the core. Reviewing my path until now entering into the Java jungle, I can say that it is easy to learn. The most difficult thing is the decisions like "should I use Eclipse with SWT over NetBeans and Swing?" - But hey, if I there would have been only the Eclipse way I would not be so happy with Java now as I am. And Swing can look cool also - thanks to plugable look and feel. The web development is for me now the most difficult decision - maybe because of the wider range of libraries and frameworks available. None seems to be THE solution. Yes, there is room for improvement and maybe there will be even more new stuff and any of us can contribute. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to javaposse@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to javaposse+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
