Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Java EE

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 90 posts

Re: Java EE

#61

Post by bdcravens »

pjmlp wrote: post #27
g051051 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're mistaking Microsoft's purely reactive strategy to something like real planning and commitment to open source. MSFT has been pushing into that area (sort of) recently because they kept getting their lunch stolen by all of the open source technologies out there. Do you think it was anything but the most incredible terror and desperation that drove them to add a Linux subsystem to Windows? To open source their "c…

As much as I like .NET, the truth is that they are loosing mindshare among new generations. "Microsoft’s Open Source Developer Journey" https://channel9.msdn.com/Events/Visual-Studio/Live-2017/Key...

Interestingly, I'm seeing VS Code alot these days amongst "new generation" developers.

Re: Java EE

#62

Post by pjmlp »

0xbear wrote: post #54
pjmlp wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Meanwhile .NET is only fully usable in Windows for many types of applications, because .NET Core and Mono don't support all the platforms that Java does and .NET Standard 2.0 does not yet cover APIs like WPF, Systems.Drawing, WCF, ADO.NET drivers for all relevant enterprise databases. So it is not like everything is better on the other side. Note that I do enjoy using both of them since their early versions.

Java is not really usable anywhere for e.g. GUI, so there's that as well.

Android, UNIX and embedded devices (Ricoh printers and medical devices, factory controls for exemple) prove otherwise.

The only problema with Swing (JavaFX not so much) is developers coding away withouth bothering to learn how to use them.

Yes, out of the box they are harder to use than Windows Forms, but anyone that bothers to read books like "Filthy Rich Clients" is able to tame Swing.

When .NET Core starts supporting a standard GUI (eventually Xamarin.Forms) than runs in all platforms that Java GUIs run today, then you can complain.

Re: Java EE

#63

Post by hildaman »

devonkim wrote: post #39
geodel wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't the whole J2EE business evolved for outsourcing IT work?

J2EE was designed for an era when big, monolithic entities were creating most of the production-grade software out there, SMP hardware was extremely expensive and capital-intensive, and open source software was largely considered a joke by those with the buying decisions. It made sense to try to target large entities that have developed decades of abstractions supposedly meant to reflect how complex (perhaps complect…

I don't understand your comment.

To me the beauty of JEE on the backend is: 1. Scalability - the application server creates as many instances as needed - until it hits either the JVM limit or the machine limit. 2. Declarative transaction management so I can write reusable code that interacts with the database without having to worry about transaction boundaries. 3. Excellent and portable Object Relationship Mapping (Java Persistence Architecture).

On the front end, with JSF webpages can be developed very quickly.

There are a lot of other things you get with JEE like Asynchronous Messaging (JMS) - built in.

There is a reason mature organizations worth billions of dollars and with highly skilled architecture teams have settled on JEE as the defacto standard for their information systems.

There is definitely a learning curve with JEE, and someone fresh out of school will need a year or two to really understand how it fits together - but when you write something in this framework, it is easy to read, maintain and rarely needs to be re-written.

Most importantly, the framework will continue to be developed for the foreseeable future - I mean multiple decades.

On the other hand, some of the newer javascript stuff - is horrible broken spaghetti code that is glued together by spit and prayer. 99% of these frameworks will fall out of fashion with the associated problems that come with falling out of fashion - the canonical example being Ruby On Rails.

Re: Java EE

#64

Post by bdcravens »

bad_user wrote: post #8
nxc18 wrote: post #3

How is this just happening now? Java is super popular in the open source and academic communities, but C# has been ahead of them since its start with an open specification, open implementations, and for the past few years, a full-throttle open source effort. What's going on?

On C# having had an incomplete ECMA specification always lagging behind and source code made available under an obscure, non- open-source, legally tainting license acting as a boobytrap for anything commercial DOES NOT count as open . Even now they are being disingenuous about license changes, witness for example the leadership of this project changing license from Apache 2.0 to MIT and being obtuse about the licensi…

> I'm replying this because I'm getting tired of Microsoft's marketing campaigns on this forum.

Can you substantiate that claim?

Re: Java EE

#65

Post by cratermoon »

devonkim wrote: post #39
geodel wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't the whole J2EE business evolved for outsourcing IT work?

J2EE was designed for an era when big, monolithic entities were creating most of the production-grade software out there, SMP hardware was extremely expensive and capital-intensive, and open source software was largely considered a joke by those with the buying decisions. It made sense to try to target large entities that have developed decades of abstractions supposedly meant to reflect how complex (perhaps complect…

Much of Java EE was driven by IBM: EJBs are in a broad sense a Java wrapper around CICS transactions.

Re: Java EE

#66

Post by cratermoon »

deong wrote: post #42
0xbear wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It never was "Windows only": https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc749640.aspx . Mono arrived shortly thereafter. And it had open spec right from the start. Patents were an issue though, there's no disagreement on that point.

Mono was awesome for what it was, and I'm not trying to denigrate those early efforts, but what it was wasn't really enough to say .Net wasn't Windows only. It didn't support WinForms, so no GUI application built for Windows would work on Mono without a major rewrite. Performance was also pretty bad in my experience. We built an optimization engine while I was in grad school for a funding source that mandated Windows…

Mono was great for the kind of programs you would write in Python if you worked for a company that used any F/OSS under protest and held it at arms length when it couldn't avoid using it.

Re: Java EE

#67

Post by xapata »

myth_drannon wrote: post #17

Looking at the people who belong to this organization, I get the feeling that the majority of the JavaEE development was outsourced to India.

Except for a few old white dudes.

Re: Java EE

#68

Post by ghrifter »

nxc18 wrote: post #3

How is this just happening now? Java is super popular in the open source and academic communities, but C# has been ahead of them since its start with an open specification, open implementations, and for the past few years, a full-throttle open source effort. What's going on?

Are you still in school, new to the industry, or both?

Re: Java EE

#69

Post by DonbunEf7 »

stupidcar wrote: post #40
g051051 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're mistaking Microsoft's purely reactive strategy to something like real planning and commitment to open source. MSFT has been pushing into that area (sort of) recently because they kept getting their lunch stolen by all of the open source technologies out there. Do you think it was anything but the most incredible terror and desperation that drove them to add a Linux subsystem to Windows? To open source their "c…

It's funny how software developers have no problem whatsoever dealing with complexity, except when it comes to corporate behaviour, when they are unable to conceive of a company as anything other than a single, gestalt entity, with a single opinion and purpose, whose actions are driven by the most basic emotions and can be classified as good or evil with absolutely no grey-area. In the real world, companies are made…

You're not wrong, but you're not sufficiently right yet. You are saying that folks see only the forest, but you want to point out that there are lots of trees. Open your eyes: There are trees and forests.

A corporation has a power structure which necessarily is independent from any one person. It follows that there is something about corporations which is distinct from its employees. Look at a business as both having employees, who are people, and being a corporation, which is like a golem.

Re: Java EE

#70

Post by watwut »

devonkim wrote: post #39
geodel wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't the whole J2EE business evolved for outsourcing IT work?

J2EE was designed for an era when big, monolithic entities were creating most of the production-grade software out there, SMP hardware was extremely expensive and capital-intensive, and open source software was largely considered a joke by those with the buying decisions. It made sense to try to target large entities that have developed decades of abstractions supposedly meant to reflect how complex (perhaps complect…

" what skilled, talented developers want to stake their careers working on software used only by a community that is in a multi-decade crisis?"

What multi-decade crisis are you talking about? Not everyone is hipster afraid to learn abstractions or unable to comprehend them. There is learning curve to J2EE and especially early versions were hard to learn, but willingness or ability to learn is not exactly mark of no-talented developer. Low skilled untalented developers go for easy to learn technologies.

Integration projects are difficult for many reasons, technology choice is not one of them.

Post reply on HN