Thursday, March 13, 2003

Modelers vs. Techies Ted Neward: EJB is a specification designed by and for modelers who don't want to deal with the underlying details of how the system is going to work. You tell it, Ted. 10:05:41 PM    comment []

TechEngage J2EE vs. .NET Shootout Boy was it difficult to sit still and keep quiet during the J2EE vs. .NET Shootout. Having had a day to digest the debate, here are some observations: The debate did not get to great technical depth. I do not intend this is not a criticism. Seriously. :-) Given the time, the format, and the varied audience, it would be a mistake to try for technical depth. The more important thing is to distinguish yourself from the other vendors by clarity of vision and message. Points to JBoss's "We're free and we don't suck." The .NET team emphasized "new" features of .NET that have been in Java for quite a long time, such as code access security. Mistake! This argument plays better for Java than for .NET. Better to spend time on .NET features that Java lacks (for now), such as attributes. Sun criticized .NET for making interop easy, saying that the ability to enter unmanaged code makes C# less secure than Java. This half-truth is a particular peeve of mine, given the effort I have personally spent on Java/Win32 interop. Both Java and .NET have native interop capabilities. Both lock down this capability using the SecurityManager/CAS. The only real difference is that Microsoft's native interop is way easier to use. Both teams agreed about some key points, while differing as to interpretation. For example: While Java exists layered with various other technologies, .NET is a tightly integrated stack. The .NET team argued that this integration boosts performance, since they can move key code sections down into the kernel. Also, unified systems are easier to manage. The J2EE team argued that Java's layering prevents vendor lock-in and provides flexibility for real-world organizations that must integrate disparate hardware and software. Each vendor had two rebuttal cards that they could use to rebut claims from the other team. The high point of the night was when Borland (on the .NET team) used their rebuttal to invite Marc Fleury from JBoss to temporarily switch sides and critique his fellow J2EE vendors--which he did. IBM and Microsoft claimed to be co-leading the development of web service standards, and the other vendors did not attack this claim. I bet "everyone else" is more worried than they seem. Think about it. IBM and Microsoft both know firsthand what a hassle an anti-trust investigation can be. The best they can hope for, long-term, is an oligopoly of two, a la Coke and Pepsi. Hmmm... 9:53:42 PM    comment []