Australian IT – J2EE, .NET in slugfest


Some of you may have seen the article by Eric Wilson in Australian IT, entitled J2EE, .NET in slugfest


Good sensational headline.


I was even quoted in the article, which is nice.


What I didn't understand was Eric's point.


He quoted some data from an "unpublished Gartner survey", which states



"of the 107 companies questioned, ...... a whopping 71 per cent say they use, or plan to use, Microsoft's Visual Studio .NET programming environment". 


Hmmmm.


Then we have the following statement from a SUN Spokesperson -



"Sun Microsystems software business manager Laurie Wong says this is why Google chose AJAX (Asynchronous JavaScript and XML) rather than .NET for its GMail service".


Huh??. What does AJAX have to do with J2EE?? AJAX is white hot at the moment, but it was implemented by Outlook Web Access years ago. As far as I know AJAX is not a J2EE thing, and it is not a technology in itself, but a term that refers to the use of a group of technologies together, and folks using ASP.NET can do the AJAX dance too. I don't get this comment, unless the person thinks that Javascript is Java, and we all know that is not the case, don't we?


Then Eric has a quote from a "Former J2EE developer"  who says



"relying on open source frameworks makes J2EE programmers unproductive, with up to 20 frameworks downloaded from the internet into each project."


Hmmmm again.


The article goes on with some comments by folks from both sides of the fence, as well as more comment from Gartner's unpublished report, but then it ended kinda abruptly. As I mentioned before I don't get the conclusion. Where's the promised slugfest? What was Eric trying to say?


Anyone know??


[ Currently Playing : Cigarettes Will Kill You - Ben Lee - Breathing Tornados (03:50) ]

Comments (6)
  1. Bernard says:

    Very disappointing piece of writing especially from The Australian. The writing was unfocused in it’s objectives and the writer used less creditable data to back his points. Can’t even get the facts right.

    Amateur piece of writing at best, which should not ever appear in The Australian.

  2. MSDN Archive says:

    It amazes me how a hard it was to read this story, it seems it had no aim, gave no real opinion in any direction, and wrote the whole piece without using one paragraph

  3. Spud says:

    Why does anyone bother to read their crap in the first place?

  4. Garry Trinder says:

    I work in the industry and while I’d never profess to be perfect this article is horrible.

    Mistakes I can understand but did anybody read it? I mean, maybe other than putting it through a spell check and grammar?

    Laurie’s comments seem to be taken out of context (notice no direct quote from Laurie on the AJAX comment). Good to see the writer didn’t screw up your quote though Frank. It was the only worthwhile part of the story.

    There seems to be no premise for the article, no conclusion, and just trails off with quotes from random people about random software development issues.

    A lot of the technical stuff is wrong too.

Comments are closed.

Skip to main content