|
|
Browse by Tags
All Tags » Java/J2EE (RSS)
-
This comment deserves response: First of all, if you're quoting my post, blocking out my name, and attacking me behind my back by calling me "our intrepid troll", you could have shown the decency of linking back to my original post. Here it is, for those interested in the real discussion: http://www.agilesoftwaredevelopment.com/blog/jurgenappelo/professionalism-knowledge-first Well, frankly, I didn't get your post from your blog, I got it from an email 'zine (as indicated by the comment "This crossed my Inbox..."), and I didn't really think that anybody would have any difficulty tracking down where it came from, at least in terms of the email blast that put it into my Inbox. Coupled with the fact that, quite honestly, I don't generally make a practice of using peoples' names without their permission (and my email to the author asking if I could quote the post with his name attached generated no response), so I blocked out the name. Having said that, I'm pleased to offer full credit as to its source. Now, let's review some of your remarks: "COBOL is (at least) twenty years old, so therefore any use of COBOL must clearly be as idiotic." I never talked about COBOL, or any other programming language. I was talking about old practices that are nowadays considered harmful and seriously damaging. (Like practising waterfall project management, instead of agile project management.) I don't see how programming in COBOL could seriously damage a business. Why do you compare COBOL with lobotomies? I don't understand. I couldn't care less about programming languages. I care about management practices. Frankly, the distinction isn't very clear in your post, and even more frankly, to draw a distinction here is a bit specious. "I didn't mean we should throw away the good stuff that's twenty years old, only the bad stuff!" doesn't seem much like a defense to me. There are cases where waterfall style development is exactly the right thing to do a more agile approach is exactly the wrong thing to do--the difference, as I'm fond of saying, lies entirely in the context of the problem. Analogously, there are cases where keeping an existing COBOL system up and running is the wrong thing to do, and replacing it with a new system is the right thing to do. It all depends on context, and for that reason, any dogmatic suggestion otherwise is flawed. "How can a developer honestly claim to know "what it can be good for", without some kind of experience to back it?" I'm talking about gaining Read More...
|
-
Recently this little gem crossed my Inbox.... Professionalism = Knowledge First, Experience Last By J----- A----- Do you trust a doctor with diagnosing your mental problems if the doctor tells you he's got 20 years of experience? Do you still trust that doctor when he picks up his tools, and asks you to prepare for a lobotomy? Would you still be impressed if the doctor had 20 years of experience in carrying out lobotomies? I am always skeptic when people tell me they have X years of experience in a certain field or discipline, like "5 years of experience as a .NET developer", "8 years of experience as a project manager" or "12 years of experience as a development manager". It is as if people's professional levels need to be measured in years of practice. This, of course, is nonsense. Professionalism is measured by what you are going to do now ... Are you going to use some discredited technique from half a century ago? • Are you, as a .NET developer, going to use Response.Write, because you've got 5 years of experience doing exactly that? • Are you, as a project manager, going to create Gantt charts, because that's what you've been doing for 8 years? • Are you, as a development manager, going to micro-manage your team members, as you did in the 12 years before now? If so, allow me to illustrate the value of your experience... (Photo of "Zero" signs) Here's an example of what it means to be a professional: There's a concept called Kanban making headlines these days in some parts of the agile community. I honestly and proudly admit that I have no experience at all in applying Kanban. But that's just a minor inconvenience. Because I have attained the knowledge of what it is and what it can be good for. And now there are some planning issues in our organization for which this Kanban-stuff might be the perfect solution. I'm sure we're going to give it a shot, in a controlled setting, with time allocated for a pilot and proper evaluations afterwards. That's the way a professional tries to solve a problem. Professionals don't match problems with their experiences. They match them with their knowledge. Sure, experience is useful. But only when you already have the knowledge in place. Experience has no value when there's no knowledge to verify that you are applying the right experience. Knowledge Comes First, Experience Comes Last This is my message to anyone who wants to be a professional software developer, a professional project manager, or a professional development Read More...
|
-
If you've peeked at my blog site in the last twenty minutes or so, you've probably noticed some churn in the template in the upper-left corner; by now, it's been finalized, and it reads "JOB REFERRALS". WTHeck? Has Ted finally sold out? Sort of, not really. At least, I don't think so. Here's the deal: the company behind those ads, Entice Labs, contacted me to see if I was interested in hosting some job ads on my blog, given that I seem to generate a moderate amount of traffic. I figured it was worthwhile to at least talk to them, and the more I did, the more I liked what I heard--the ads are focused specifically at developers of particular types (I chose a criteria string of "Software Developers", subcategorized by "Java, .NET, .NET (Visual Basic), .NET (C#), C++, Flex, Ruby on Rails, C, SQL, JavaScript, HTML" though I'm not sure whether "HTML" will bring in too many web-designer jobs), and visitors to my blog don't have to click through the ads to get to the content, which was important to me. And, besides, given the current economic climate, if I can help somebody find a new job, I'd like to. Now for the full disclaimer: I will be getting money back from these job ads, though how much, to be honest with you, I'm not sure. I'm really not doing this for the money, so I make this statement now: I will take 50% of whatever I make through this program and donate it to a charitable organization. The other 50% I will use to offset travel and expenses to user groups and/or CodeCamps and/or for-free conferences put on throughout the country. (Email me if you know of one that you're organizing or attending and would like to see me speak at, and I'll tell you if there's any room in the budget left for it. :-) ) Anyway, I figured if the ads got too obnoxious, I could always remove them; it's an experiment of sorts. Tell me what you think. Enterprise consulting, mentoring or instruction. Java, C++, .NET or XML services. 1-day or multi-day workshops available. Contact me for details . Read More...
|
-
After the previous post, I just had to look. The implementation of Object.equals is, as was previously noted, just "return this == obj", but the implementation of Object.hashCode is far more complicated. Taken straight from the latest hg-pulled OpenJDK sources, Object.hashCode is a native method registered from Object.c that calls into a Hotspot-exported function, JVM_IHashCode(), from hotspot\src\share\vm\prims\jvm.cpp: JVM_ENTRY(jint, JVM_IHashCode(JNIEnv* env, jobject handle)) JVMWrapper( "JVM_IHashCode" ); // as implemented in the classic virtual machine; return 0 if object is NULL return handle == NULL ? 0 : ObjectSynchronizer::FastHashCode (THREAD, JNIHandles::resolve_non_null(handle)) ; JVM_END which in turn calls ObjectSynchronizer::FastHashCode, defined in hotspot\src\share\vm\runtime\synchronizer.cpp as: intptr_t ObjectSynchronizer::FastHashCode (Thread * Self, oop obj) { if (UseBiasedLocking) { // NOTE: many places throughout the JVM do not expect a safepoint // to be taken here, in particular most operations on perm gen // objects. However, we only ever bias Java instances and all of // the call sites of identity_hash that might revoke biases have // been checked to make sure they can handle a safepoint. The // added check of the bias pattern is to avoid useless calls to // thread-local storage. if (obj->mark()->has_bias_pattern()) { // Box and unbox the raw reference just in case we cause a STW safepoint. Handle hobj (Self, obj) ; // Relaxing assertion for bug 6320749. assert (Universe::verify_in_progress() || !SafepointSynchronize::is_at_safepoint(), "biases should not be seen by VM thread here" ); BiasedLocking::revoke_and_rebias(hobj, false, JavaThread::current()); obj = hobj() ; assert(!obj->mark()->has_bias_pattern(), "biases should be revoked by now" ); } } // hashCode() is a heap mutator ... // Relaxing assertion for bug 6320749. assert (Universe::verify_in_progress() || !SafepointSynchronize::is_at_safepoint(), "invariant" ) ; assert (Universe::verify_in_progress() || Self->is_Java_thread() , "invariant" ) ; assert (Universe::verify_in_progress() || ((JavaThread *)Self)->thread_state() != _thread_blocked, "invariant" ) ; ObjectMonitor* monitor = NULL; markOop temp, test; intptr_t hash; markOop mark = ReadStableMark (obj); // object should remain ineligible for biased locking assert (!mark->has_bias_pattern(), "invariant" ) ; if (mark->is_neutral()) { hash = mark->hash(); // this is a normal header if (hash) { Read More...
|
-
I'm not sure what it is about our industry that promotes the flame war, but for some reason exchanges like this one , unheard of in any other industry I've ever touched (even tangentially), are far too common, too easy to get into, and entirely too counterproductive. I'm not going to weigh in on one side or the other here; frankly, I have a hard time following the debate and figuring out who's exactly arguing for what. I can see, however, that the entire debate follows some traditional patterns of the flame war: Citing yourself as the final authority. At no point during the debate does anybody reach for their copy of Effective Java , a widely-accepted source of Java guidance, for a potential resolution to the discussion. Instead, the various players simply say, "Fact A is true" or "Fact A is false", with zero supporting information, citations, or demonstrations either way. (A few people cite the Javadoc, but there is enough ambiguity there to merit further citation.) Refusal to accept the possibility of an alternative viewpoint. At no point, near as I can tell, did any of the participants bother to say, "You know, you could be right, but I remain unconvinced. Can you give me more information to support your point of view?" The entire time, everybody is arguing from "fact", and nobody even considers the possibility that different JVMs can have different implementations, despite the fact that the Javadoc being quoted says as much. Degeneration into personal attacks. I don't care who started it, I don't care who called who the worse name. Fact is, reasonable people can reasonably disagree, and nobody in that transcript seemed overly reasonable to me. Nobody ever really gets around to answering the question because they're too busy arguing their position or point. Poor "doub", the initiator of the question, tries valiantly to circle the conversation back on topic, but the various players are too busy whipping out their instruments of manhood onto the table so everybody can see how much bigger it is than the other guys'. When "doub" points out that writing some sample code "gave me a very loose but still usefull information about my object, and took less time than the conversation about my question :-)", or in other words, "Hey, guys, I kinda already got my answer, can we move on now?", the conversation continues as if the comment never occurred--the question has turned into a "biggest-geek" argument by this point. "doub" even asks, at 10:12:12, "do i get bad karma Read More...
|
-
The Pragmatic Programmer says, "Learn a new language every year". This is great advice, not just because it puts new tools into your mental toolbox that you can pull out on various occasions to get a job done, but also because it opens your mind to new ideas and new concepts that will filter their way into your code even without explicit language support. For example, suppose you've looked at (J/Iron)Ruby or Groovy, and come to like the "internal iterator" approach as a way of simplifying moving across a collection of objects in a uniform way; for political and cultural reasons, though, you can't write code in anything but Java. You're frustrated, because local anonymous functions (also commonly--and, I think, mistakenly--called closures ) are not a first-class concept in Java. Then, you later look at Haskell/ML/Scala/F#, which makes heavy use of what Java programmers would call "static methods" to carry out operations, and realize that this could, in fact, be adapted to Java to give you the "internal iteration" concept over the Java Collections: 1: package com.tedneward.util; 2: 3: import java.util.*; 4: 5: public interface Acceptor 6: { 7: public void each(Object obj); 8: } 9: 10: public class Collection 11: { 12: public static void each(List list, Acceptor acc) 13: { 14: for (Object o : list) 15: acc.each(o); 16: } 17: } Where using it would look like this: 1: import com.tedneward.util.*; 2: 3: List personList = ...; 4: Collection.each( new Accpetor() { 5: public void each(Object person) { 6: System.out.println( "Found person " + person + ", isn't that nice?" ); 7: } 8: }); Is it quite as nice or as clean as using it from a language that has first-class support for anonymous local functions? No, but slowly migrating over to this style has a couple of definitive effects, most notably that you will start grooming the rest of your team (who may be reluctant to pick up these new languages) towards the new ideas that will be present in Groovy, and when they finally do see them (as they will, eventually, unless they hide under rocks on a daily basis), they will realize what's going on here that much more quickly, and start adding their voices to the call to start using (J/Iron)Ruby/Groovy for certain things in the codebase you support. (By the way, this is so much easier to do in C# 2.0, thanks to generics, static classes and anonymous delegates... 1: namespace TedNeward.Util 2: { 3: public delegate void EachProc<T>(T obj); 4: public static class Collection Read More...
|
-
I recently had the pleasure of meeting Bruce Wilson, a principal with iLink, and we had a pleasant conversation about enterprise applications and trends and such. Last week, in the middle of my trip to Prague and Zurich , he sent me a link to a blog entry he'd written on using Office as a front-end , and it sort of underscored some ideas I've had around Office in general. The interesting thing is, most of the ideas he talks about here could just as easily be implemented on top of a Java back-end, or a Ruby back-end, as a .NET back-end. Office is a tool that many end-users "get" right away (whether you agree with Microsoft's user interface metaphors or not, or even like the fact that Office is one of the most widely-installed software packages on the planet), and it has a lot of support infrastructure built in. "Mashup" doesn't have to mean YouTube on your website; in fact, I dislike the term "mashup" entirely, since it sounds like something done in the heat of the moment without any planning or thought (which is the antithesis of anything that goes--or should go--into the enterprise). Can we use the term " cardinality " instead? Please? Enterprise consulting, mentoring or instruction. Java, C++, .NET or XML services. 1-day or multi-day workshops available. Contact me for details . Read More...
|
-
As Amanda notes , I'm riding with 46 other folks (and lots of beer) on a bus from Michigan to devLink in Tennessee, as part of sponsoring the show. (I think she got my language preferences just a teensy bit mixed up, though.) Which brings up a related point, actually: Amanda (of "the great F# T-shirt" fame from TechEd this year) and I are teaming up to do F# In A Nutshell for O'Reilly. The goal is to have a Rough Cut ready (just the language parts) by the time F# goes CTP this summer or fall, so we're on an accelerated schedule. If you don't see much from me via the blog for a while, now you know why. :-) Once that's done, I'm going dark on a Scala book to follow--details to follow when that contract is nailed down. Meanwhile.... As she suggests, the bus will likely be filled with lots of lively debate. The nice thing about having a technical debate with drunk geeks on a bus traveling down the highway at speed is that it's actually pretty easy to win the debate, if you really want to: "You are such an idiot! Object-relashunal mappers are just... *burp* so cool! Why can't you see that?" "Idiot, am I? I demand satisfaction! Step outside, sir!" "Fine, you--" WHOOSH ... THUMP-THUMP.... "Next?" I'm looking forward to this. :-) Editor's note: (Contact Amanda if you're interested in participating.) Enterprise consulting, mentoring or instruction. Java, C++, .NET or XML services. 1-day or multi-day workshops available. Contact me for details . Read More...
|
-
I've been asked to put together a list of the "best" Java resources that every up-and-coming Java developer should have, and I'd like this list to be as comprehensive as possible and, more importantly, reflect more than just my own opinion. So, either through comments or through email , let me know what you think the best Java resources are in the following categories: Websites and developer Web portals Weblogs/RSS feeds. (Not all have to be hand-authored blogs--if you find an RSS feed for news on java.net projects, for example, that would count as well.) Java packages and/or libaries. (Either those within Java Standard Edition--a la Reflection or the Scripting API--or from Enterprise Edition--a la JMS--or even third-party packages, a la Spring.) Conferences, even including those that I don't speak at. ;-) Books. Tools. (IDEs, build tools, static analysis tools, either commercial or open source.) Future trends you think bear watching. There is, of course, no prize to be won here, and I'd please ask the vendors (commercial or open source) who watch my blog to avoid outright advertisements in comments (though you are free to rattle off the various advantages of your product in an email to me), in order to avoid turning this weblog into a gigantic row of billboards along the freeway. I am interested in peoples' opinions, however, and more importantly, why you think X should be on that list, or even why Y shouldn't. Keep it civil, though, please--I'll delete any comments that get too vindictive or offensive. (That doesn't mean that you have to agree with me--just avoid calling anybody names. Basic 'Netiquette.) Oh, and if you want to be mentioned in the article (which will be published on an international developer site), please indicate how you'd like to be accredited. Or not. Whatever you prefer. Enterprise consulting, mentoring or instruction. Java, C++, .NET or XML services. 1-day or multi-day workshops available. Contact me for details . Read More...
|
-
Steve Yegge posted the transcript from a talk on dynamic languages that he gave at Stanford. Cedric Beust posted a response to Steve's talk, espousing statically-typed languages. Numerous comments and flamewars erupted, not to mention a Star Wars analogy (which always makes things more fun). This is my feeble attempt to play galactic peacemaker. Or at least galactic color commentary and play-by-play. I have no doubts about its efficacy, and that it will only fan the flames, for that's how these things work. Still, I feel a certain perverse pleasure in pretending, so.... Enjoy the carnage that results. First of all, let me be very honest: I like Steve's talk. I think he does a pretty good job of representing the negatives and positives of dynamic languages, though there are obviously places where I'm going to disagree: "Because we all know that C++ has some very serious problems, that organizations, you know, put hundreds of staff years into fixing. Portability across compiler upgrades, across platforms, I mean the list goes on and on and on. C++ is like an evolutionary sort of dead-end. But, you know, it's fast, right?" Funny, I doubt Bjarne Stroustrup or Herb Sutter would agree with the "evolutionary dead-end" statement, but they're biased, so let's put that aside for a moment. Have organizations put hundreds of staff years into fixing the problems of C++? Possibly--it would be good to know what Steve considers the "very serious problems" of C++, because that list he does give (compiler/platform/language upgrades and portability across platforms) seems problematic regardless of the langauge or platform you choose--Lord knows we saw that with Java, and Lord knows we see it with ECMAScript in the browser, too. The larger question should be, can, and does, the language evolve? Clearly, based on the work in the Boost libraries and the C++0X standards work, the answer is yes, every bit as much as Java or C#/.NET is, and arguably much more so than what we're seeing in some of the dynamic languages. C++ is getting a standardized memory model, which will make a portable threading package possible, as well as lambda expressions, which is a far cry from the language that I grew up with. That seems evolutionary to me. What's more, Bjarne has said, point-blank, that he prefers taking a slow approach to adopting new features or ideas, so that it can be "done right", and I think that's every bit a fair position to take, regardless of whether I agree with it or not. (I'd Read More...
|
-
Steve Vinoski thinks to deflate my arguments with suppositions and presumptions , which I cannot simply let stand. (Sorry, Steve-O, but I think you're out in left field on this one. I'm happy to argue it further with you over beer, but if you want the last word, have at it, and we'll compare scores when we run into each other at the next conference.) Steve first takes aim at my comparison of the Erlang process model to the *nix process model: First, Ted says: Erlang’s reliability model–that is, the spawn-a-thousand-processes model–is not unique to Erlang. In fact, it’s been the model for Unix programs and servers, most notably the Apache web server, for decades. When building a robust system under Unix, a master-slave model, in which a master process spawns (and monitors) n number of child processes to do the actual work, offers that same kind of reliability and robustness. If one of these processes fail (due to corrupted memory access, operating system fault, or what-have-you), the process can simply die and be replaced by a new child process. There’s really no comparison between the UNIX process model (which BTW I hold in very high regard) and Erlang’s approach to achieving high reliability. They are simply not at all the same, and there’s no way you can claim that UNIX “offers that same kind of reliability and robustness” as Erlang can. If it could, wouldn’t virtually every UNIX process be consistently yielding reliability of five nines or better? What Steve misses here is that just because something can , doesn't mean it does . Processes in *nix are just as vulnerable to bad coding practices as are processes in Windows or Mac OS X, and let's be very clear: the robustness and reliability of a system is entirely held hostage to the skill and care of the worst programmer on the system. There is a large difference between theory and practice, Steve, and whether somebody takes *nix up on that offer depends a great deal on how much they're interested in building robust and reliable software. This is where a system's architecture becomes so important--architecture leads developers down a particular path, enabling them to fall into what Rico Mariani once described as "the pit of success", or what I like to call "correctness by default". Windows leads developers down a single-process/multi-thread-based model, and UNIX leads developers down a multi-process-based model. Which one seems more robust and reliable by default to you? (By the way, Erlang's model is apparently Read More...
|
-
Not too long ago, Don wrote : The three most “personal” choices a developer makes are language, tool, and OS. No. That may be true for somebody who works for a large commercial or open source vendor, whose team is building something that fits into one of those three categories and wants to see that language/tool/OS succeed. That is not where most of us live. If you do, certainly, you are welcome to your opinion, but please accept with good grace that your agenda is not the same as my own. Most of us in the practitioner space are using languages, tools and OSes to solve customer problems, and making the decision to use a particular language, tool or OS a personal one generally gets us into trouble--how many developers do you know that identify themselves so closely with that decision that they include it in their personal metadata? "Hi, I'm Joe, and I'm a Java programmer." Or, "Oh, good God, you're running Windows? What are you, some kind of Micro$oft lover or something?" Or, "Linux? You really are a geek, aren't you? Recompiled your kernel lately (snicker, snicker)?" Sorry, but all of those make me want to hurl. Of these kinds of statements are technical zealotry and flame wars built. When programmers embed their choice so deeply into their psyche that it becomes the tagline by which they identify themselves, it becomes an "ego" thing instead of a "tool" thing. What's more, it involves customers and people outside the field in an argument that has nothing to do with them. Think about it for a second; the last time you hired a contractor to add a deck to your house, what's your reaction when they introduce themselves as, "Hi, I'm Kim, and I'm a Craftsman contractor." Or, overheard at the job site, "Oh, good God, you're using a Skil? What are you, some kind of nut or something?" Or, as you look at the tools on their belt, "Nokita? You really are a geek, aren't you? Rebuilt your tools from scratch lately (snicker, snicker)?" Do you, the customer, really care what kind of tools they use? Or do you care more for the quality of solution they build for you? It's hard to imagine how the discussion can even come up, it's so ludicrous. Try this one on, instead: "Hi, I'm Ted, and I'm a programmer." I use a variety of languages, tools, and OSes, and my choice of which to use are all geared around a single end goal: not to promote my own social or political agenda, but to make my customer happy . Sometimes that means using C# on Windows. Sometimes that means using Java Read More...
|
-
A couple of folks have taken me to task over some of the things I said... or didn't say... in my last blog piece. So, in no particular order, let's discuss. A few commented on how I left out commentary on language X, Y or Z. That wasn't an accidental slip or surge of forgetfulness, but I didn't want to rattle off a laundry list of every language I've run across or am exploring, since that list would be much, much longer and arguably of little to no additional benefit. Having said that, though, a more comprehensive list (and more comprehensive explanation and thought process) is probably deserved, so expect to see that from me before long, maybe in the next week or two. Steve Vinoski wrote : In a recent post, Ted Neward gives a brief description of a variety of programming languages. It’s a useful post; I’ve known Ted for awhile now, and he’s quite knowledgeable about such things. Still, I have to comment on what he says about Erlang.... I might have said it like this: Erlang . Joe Armstrong’s baby was built to solve a specific set of problems at Ericsson, and from it we can learn a phenomenal amount about building highly reliable systems that can also support massive concurrency. The fact that it runs on its own interpreter, good; otherwise, the reliability wouldn’t be there and it would be just another curious but useless concurrency-oriented language experiment. Far too many blog posts and articles that touch on Erlang completely miss the point that reliability is an extremely important aspect of the language. To achieve reliability, you have to accept the fact that failure will occur, Once you accept that, then other things fall into place: you need to be able to restart things quickly, and to do that, processes need to be cheap. If something fails, you don’t want it taking everything else with it, so you need to at least minimize, if not eliminate, sharing, which leads you to message passing. You also need monitoring capabilities that can detect failed processes and restart them (BTW in the same posting Ted seems to claim that Erlang has no monitoring capabilities, which baffles me). Massive concurrency capabilities become far easier with an architecture that provides lightweight processes that share nothing, but that doesn’t mean that once you design it, the rest is just a simple matter of programming. Rather, actually implementing all this in a way that delivers what’s needed and performs more than adequately for production-quality systems is an incredibly Read More...
|
-
This just recently crossed my Inbox, this time from Redmond Developer News, and once again I'm simply amazed at the audacity of the message and rather far-fetched conclusion: FEEDBACK: THE MOVE FROM J2EE On Tuesday, I wrote about BMC's new Application Problem Resolution System 7.0 tooling, which provides "black box" monitoring and analysis of application behavior to help improve troubleshooting. http://reddevnews.com/blogs/weblog.aspx?blog=2146 In talking to BMC Director Ran Gishri, I ran across some interesting perspectives that he was able to offer on the enterprise development space. Among them, the fact that large orgs seem to be moving away from J2EE and toward a mix of .NET and sundry lightweight frameworks. Richard Eaton, an RDN reader who's a manager of database systems for Georgia System Operations Corp., confirms Gishri's insights. He wrote: "In 2003, we made a decision to build our Web application using Java and a third-party RAD tool for Java development that was locally supported at that time. Since then, the company that developed and supported that RAD tool has gone out of business and left us with virtually no support for the product. The application development that was done was very integrated into the tool, which meant we would virtually have to rewrite the entire app. So we analyzed our experience with using Apache, Linux, Java and Eclipse for our platform and realized the effort was very management-intensive for our small team, and so we looked to .NET. "Considering the advances in the .NET framework and CLR libraries and the integration it offered to our other third-party tools, as well as our prolific Excel spreadsheet environment, the decision was easy to go to .NET. We are also moving away from Sybase databases to SQL Server and looking into the use of SharePoint for various internal collaboration and project functions. The one-stop shop of Microsoft technology and support and ease of development and integration, I think, is the overwhelming weight in deciding between J2EE and .NET." First of all, I'm a little shocked that based on a conversation with one individual, we can safely infer that "large orgs" are "moving away from J2EE and toward a mix of .NET and sundry lightweight frameworks". This is fair and unbiased reporting? That's like going to Houston (home of our current sitting President), or Arizona (home of the Republican candidate), and discovering that a majority of the voters there will vote Republican in the next Presidential Read More...
|
-
So I see, via the blogosphere, that a Java 6 update is available for the Mac , so I run off to the Apple website to download the package . Click on the link, and I'm happy. Wait.... It's for 64-bit Intel Macs only ?!? Apple, why do you tease me this way? Why is it that you can build it for 64-bit machines, but not 32-bit? This just seems entirely spurious and artificial. Somebody please tell me that it's otherwise, and why, because until then, I'm going to just assume that Apple doesn't give a whit about Java. Enterprise consulting, mentoring or instruction. Java, C++, .NET or XML services. 1-day or multi-day workshops available. Contact me for details . Read More...
|
|
|
|