Marc,
MS is *not* advocating 'integrated goo' (I like this term). The
state-of-the-art: separation of function as you describe in your world is
*exactly* what .NET is all about. Therein lies the danger - these guys are
smart and are coming up with some interesting technologies that leverage
their history and current 'best-practices'.
As for my background - I'm not a Microsofty (actually I guess I am as I
understand and use their technologies) - oh well. I am also a Linux / Java
(J2EE Tech.) 'softy' and **love** what you guys are doing with the jBoss
stuff. I also agree that J2EE is the only technology which is multiplatform
etc. However, (gray hair showing) remember M6800 vs. 8080, CPM vs. DOS,
*nix vs. Windows (3.1 at that!!), Borland (OWL) vs. MFC (sob!), DirectX vs.
OpenGL, Navigator vs. Explorer, ... I have seen enough of how MS operates
to want to protect our good stuff.
The 'I don't care' remark refered to Sun's insistence that the network is
the computer (or some such) - from the point of view of the end-user, it is
the application and its functionality - the rest is plumbing. (And your
implication is correct - plumbing does matter - to us).
I guess we are in agreement (although slightly different perspectives) -
there is a huge opportunity here to get the software engineering thing
right.
Best,
Peter
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of marc fleury
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 3:34 PM
To: jBoss Developer
Subject: RE: [jBoss-Dev] Sun ONE response to MS
|Their strategy (and I think it is a good one) is to leverage the
|client side
|development stuff *into* the distributed application space and provide a
|seamless application server environment in which to execute applications.
|Not only this, but they will co-opt (through translation tools) Java
|components (classes, EJB) making 'migration' (assimilation) easier.
|
|To your point on the client driving the server - and to my point that
|interconnects becoming transparent does not change the equation (I don't
|care where my application runs, or how many machines it runs on,
|or which OS
|these machines run, or what hardware the OS runs on,...) - MS
That is not correct.
*you* don't care what OS or hardware your server app runs on ???? ohhhh I
don't believe that, are you a student are you .edu? in fact I come from a
background (SAP) where people would spend *months* and $M just figuring
**that** out.
Only a developer, and a clueless one at that, would say that.
sysadmins RULE THE WEB. Do you understand? they DEEPLY care what OS and
certainly what HARDWARE their stuff is running on. Look for that spark (pun
intended) in their eyes when they talk about the backup strategies in
distributed secured systems. You can't fuck with that.
You don't care, he cares, deeply.
Java has made the development indenpendent from the deployment. Thank GOD!
I was working in this shop where we did a big server app with fancy win32
clients all on HTTP/XML communication. It was server java (of course) and
the DEPLOYMENT environment was INDEPENDENT (TOTALLY) from the development.
They benched Linux and windows (2 years ago) and went with NT because of the
state of VMs at the time. Had the VMs been good (like they are today) and I
know they would have taken Linux for the ease of admin in farms. The fact
that we used MS visual J was IRRELEVANT.
So imho the big "seamless development environement" gospel from tool
vendors, is is a lot of goo. It is just gospel from tool vendors.
You develop it on development boxes
it goes to QA
You test on "sandboxes"
couple weeks month later
it might go into production
in the cool env of war rooms
Cycle again with the greatest of care and on all boxes.
Separate people separate concerns separate budgets separate bosses separate
building SEPARATE WORLDS etc etc...
now go in a production environment holding that integrated candle to the SUN
(pun intended) and watch the sysadmin slowly turn his face, to look at you,
and see where that peeping voice is coming from. Take a good look in his
darkened eyes, bleached by years of keeping these farms running. He will
try to parse your statement, will fail, then quickly swap you out and go
back to his console having made a "ln -s /home/bozo /dev/null" in his head.
You just disapeared physically from his production world.
I do buy that Windows **the OS** will dominate the workstation market, the
tools? maybe for .net. So you can deploy on windows. I would even argue
that you DON'T want integrated goo even in a pure MS world.
But the code you produce will need to run on any platform cause you will be
running Linux/BSD/Solaris/win2000 in the server farms... and ONLY j2ee is
answering that today. .net, in the future, will be win2000 only.
It's a stupid battle if you ask me... makes me wonder.
|*can* and will
|drive client application development into the server space by making
|invisible distributed application development (.NET) and by providing a
|managed distributed execution environment (COM+, attributed programming,
|unification of object models) - their version of an app. server.
bla bla bla bla ... nah.
They will have to fight fair and square on the server, the "integrated goo"
won't stick.
MS understands developers, they understand Client PCs, they understand
"integrated development", they don't understand sysadmins, they don't
understand networks, and I think they are NEW to the web services.
|So, what to do? Sun is in a difficult position for obvious reasons vis.
|Linux Solaris. The rest of the reasoning for Java open source, etc. goes
|here.
|
|BTW, I think IBM is going to come out of this smelling like roses - whoever
|is coming up with their strategy is doing a great job.
That is true.
|It occurs to me that the developer group may not be the most appropriate
|place for these postings. If this is the case please let me know
|and I will
|cease and desist. Anyone who wants to send email to me directly:
|[EMAIL PROTECTED]
it's fine, just turn on the brain and spot spouting marketing lines... you
are among friends here.
marc
|
|Very best regards,
| Peter
|
|-----Original Message-----
|From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of marc fleury
|Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 10:18 AM
|To: jBoss Developer
|Subject: RE: [jBoss-Dev] Sun ONE response to MS
|
|
|well ok...
|
|there was a thread on /. 2 days ago about people abandoning linux on the
|client and going with windows. well duh! I dropped linux on my laptop and
|work primarily on a win2000 VAIO bad ass machine that I am VERY happy with.
|
|My server? linux. They come with win2000 I put linux on them. Why? cause
|it stable, manageable remote, comes with all the goodies I want and I (now)
|know how to secure them easily. Ease of use, ease of use.
|
|That is the one thing that I find funny in this new battlefield. Microsoft
|has a tradition of "eating from the bottom" and they are finding themselves
|eaten ALIVE by small linux servers. I was reading a "analyst" calling
|win2000 a "failure" because it was "failing" to kill the server market and
|few sites with *nix where switching to win2000.
|
|They bet the farm on win2000 as a IT server OS. At the top they have
|Solaris at the bottom they have Linux. Are they "irrelevant" on the server
|side technology standard driving????
|
|Dont get me wrong MS is a mighty company, I love win2000 on my laptop (use
|all day long) and I wouldn't go with Linux on my laptop for anything. But
|most of MS pattern was coming "from behind" leveraging a dominant position
|in the OS CLIENT. (think of Office, Explorer etc).
|
|Where is the dominant position on the SERVER. How much can a client
|monopoly drive SERVER technology. They *obviously* don't really understand
|the "service web" despite all the .net noise. The article was answering a
|dummy (i mean the question showed ignorance). So can they
|leverage a CLIENT
|monopoly on the SERVER? well it seems NOT MUCH. HTML as a client standard
|has made MS irrelevant. XML as a data formatting standard is making
|proprietary formats of storage irrelevant (blurb about Balmer putting his
|foot in his mouth).
|
|Finally J2EE is today 90% of the market place for APPLICATION SERVERS IN
|GENERAL (all categories C server, C++) where is the dominant position there
|as well to drive their standards?
|
|So I believe microsoft is *almost* irrelevant ;) on the web. Customers
|won't go in a "lock-in" on server because win2000 isn't going places there,
|linux is, solaris will remain. So their traditional "patterns" are not
|applicable anymore. I trust them to find something interesting
|but I am not
|shaking in my boots *yet*.
|
|Ok onto SUN. SUN KNOWS THAT .NET IS A "BOTTOM UP" THREAT AND THAT IBM AND
|BEA ARE NOT GOING TO FIGHT IT OFF. .NET will be a mass market technology,
|J2EE is still "ivory tower IT". Just like Solaris sits on top of Unix, BEA
|will sit on top of J2EE. US? WE SIT AT THE BOTTOM AND WORK OUR
|WAY UP, THAT
|IS HOW WE WILL "SQUEEZE" .NET BEFORE IT IS EVEN A SERIOUS THREAT.
|
|WE ARE A NECESSARY LITTLE FIGHTING DOG IN BATTLING .NET.
|
|So SUN has a big interest in helping us thrive we are their best
|and natural
|ally in fighting Windows and .net. you are right in saying that they must
|change their position with respect to Linux and Open Source Java... we are
|working on it, it will come
|
|marc
|
|
|
||-----Original Message-----
||From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
||[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Peter F. Spicer
||Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 8:11 AM
||To: jBoss Developer
||Subject: RE: [jBoss-Dev] Sun ONE response to MS
||
||
||Microsoft is doing some interesting things with the .NET platform, some of
||which (actually a large part of which) is based on the precepts of the EJB
||architecture ('attribute' based programming and the like). As far as
||competition is concerned they are talented and aggressive. The
||responses in
||the link are good - but this guy is light weight so no victories gained.
||
||The bigger issue for the Java community is will it survive? -
|looks like it
||will right now, but it is 'closed', Sun has control and MS is putting
||together frameworks which allow the ingest and conversion of Java
||technologies to their platform (COM+). Once this is complete,
|the millions
||of windows folks will not need to switch - which is OK. BUT, market
||pressures may force us to switch. Hence MS does the usual end-run
||(Browser,
||OpenGL, ....). Sun should let go or at least modify their
|current strategy
||v. Linux and Java.
||
||BTW, check out the unification of the object models across all languages
||(and extension to same) on the .NET platform - a slick piece of software
||engineering.
||
||Sun BTW is also wrong about the relationship of software to
|hardware - just
||because the interconnects become transparent does not change the
||fundamental
||equation.
||
||-- Peter
||
||-----Original Message-----
||From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
||[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Rickard Öberg
||Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 6:38 AM
||To: jBoss Developer
||Subject: [jBoss-Dev] Sun ONE response to MS
||
||
||Hey
||
||In case you haven't seen this:
||http://www.sun.com/dot-com/realitycheck/headsup010205.html
||
||"So.. do you feel lucky.. punk!" "Kablaaam"
||
||Well.. uhm.. I thought it was funny anyway :-)
||
||regards,
|| Rickard
||
||--
||Rickard Öberg
||
||Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
||
||
||
|
|
|
|
