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

41–50 of 90 posts

Re: Java EE

#41

Post by erikbye »

g051051 wrote: post #16
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?

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…

For all of Microsoft's attacks on open source, although not altruistically, their embrace of open source is not that recent. People seem to forget they launched a successful open source hub (CodePlex) two years before GitHub, which enjoyed popularity for years.

F#'s compiler and tools has been Apache licensed since, what, 2005?

Re: Java EE

#42

Post by deong »

0xbear wrote: post #36
dtech wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep, the CLR/VM is a much better target for languages and C# fixes a lot of Java's mistakes. It's such a shame that Microsoft until recently kept it so tightly controlled and Windows only. If that hadn't been the case the ecosystem (libraries and languages) might have been a lot more up to par when compared to the JVM ecosystem.

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, so we wrote the application in C#/.Net. I would develop on Linux at the time, and I built a version of the application that had no GUI so it could run under Mono, but it was easily an order of magnitude slower.

It kind of worked for a small slice of .Net programs (e.g., those that didn't rely on WinForms or any other non-implemented part of the stack). That's about all you could say for it for quite some time.

Re: Java EE

#43

Post by Pica_soO »

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…

Well, maybe he is not talking about those people, but about the decision makers. And those strategic decision makers (a rather small community) dont love open source. Yes, even the new generation.

Nobody does risky moves out of the sheer joy of doing them, especially if you have shareholders holding the Damocles sword of share-value over your neck.

You do them, when you run out of options.

Re: Java EE

#44

Post by pjmlp »

0xbear wrote: post #37
pjmlp wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sun had an allergic reaction to it. Oracle has improved it quite a bit and all those features are being worked on for Java 10.

And they will be worked on for at least the next decade. Meanwhile .NET had them for 16 years now.

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.

Re: Java EE

#46

Post by g051051 »

erikbye wrote: post #41
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…

For all of Microsoft's attacks on open source, although not altruistically, their embrace of open source is not that recent. People seem to forget they launched a successful open source hub (CodePlex) two years before GitHub, which enjoyed popularity for years. F#'s compiler and tools has been Apache licensed since, what, 2005?

CodePlex was created because they didn't want to use the (at the time) standard for Open Source, SourceForge. They abandoned it when GitHub rose to prominence. This was pretty much exactly what Google did as well, with Google Code.

Re: Java EE

#47

Post by sgt »

My unit (previously Java EE focused) has since moved onto vert.x for enterprise Java development. It's worth checking out.

Re: Java EE

#48

Post by pjmlp »

holydude wrote: post #34
pjmlp wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

They are but they are trying to adapt. .NET core is an extremely aggressive way for them to attract the new generation. It's funny because the new generations still use Windows to develop on and Linux to deploy to and no one is denying this. But Microsoft somehow is accepting this shift and is trying to bring its stack on Linux and also Linux on Windows. I think Microsoft is smart,they really realized unlike Oracle a…

Yes, Microsoft is pulling an IBM, because they are fully aware that if they don't change, long term it will make them suffer really bad.

Re: Java EE

#49

Post by munificent »

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…

I think a lot of people get into software because they dislike complexity and code gives them the opportunity to tackle it. You can't "solve" the complexity of humans and human interaction.

Re: Java EE

#50

Post by Garbage »

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.

Sorry, I don't understand your point. Are you trying to say, JavaEE is bad, or outsourcing to India is bad, or the code quality is bad?
Post reply on HN