Discussions

News: J2EE versus .NET Web Services

  1. J2EE versus .NET Web Services (11 messages)

    This week on WebServicesArchitect.com, J. Jeffrey Hanson takes a look at the ways in which MS.NET and J2EE handle Web Services, along with a brief examination of why you would want to take one approach or the other.
    On the face of it, there may be little to choose between the implementations. Will either side really expect conversions to their platform? Will there be any? Will it boil down to a speed versus scalability/reliability argument?

    Read the article here.

    Also, check out The J2EE vs. .NET whitepaper on TheServerSide.com.

    Threaded Messages (11)

  2. J2EE versus .NET Web Services[ Go to top ]

    Seems like the J2EE vs .NET is more of a marketing battle right now than technical:

    http://news.zdnet.co.uk/story/0,,t269-s2102244,00.html
  3. J2EE versus .NET Web Services[ Go to top ]

    I agree Gene.


    "The key advantage, perhaps, of using the .NET approach to Web Services is that it has been designed for that purpose, whereas J2EE is being retrofitted by the addition of further APIs." -The author

    How come no mention of the win OS being retrofitted for web services via .net, which is why there are frequent crashes ?
  4. J2EE versus .NET Web Services[ Go to top ]

    Hi Gene,

    The URL that you mentioned is a must-read for us all:

    http://news.zdnet.co.uk/story/0,,t269-s2102244,00.html

    The reason? It appears that everyone at Microsoft is writing web services (as many as 228 web services per employee) and this can give us insight into where Microsoft is going so we can be prepared!

    I think the bad news for Microsoft from the article is that few ZD Net UK readers (other than Microsoft employees) are building in .NET. Surprisingly few, if my reading of the article is correct.

    Peace,

    Cameron.
  5. I am not sure why there is lot of hoopla on .net and j2ee.
    Every one knows and its very much evident that J2EE works hands down in Enterprise applications domain hands down for its WORA, Ease of use, Easy to architect, design develop and deploy on variety of platforms with minimum or no changes in the source code.

    On any platforms ( I have worked on sun solaris, windows various flavors and linux)
    I strongly recomond, linux or solaris for its mere performance and sturdiness.
    Well, windows, the less said the better (windows 98 for instance) and even my XP hangs automatically. This is one feature which microsoft has to fix before they comeout with any more new technologies. They are not able to fix bugs in existing infrastructures,they come out with more and which leads to more bugs, security holes etc.,

    I have been evaluating C# (c sharp) recently .
    Well, this is a new language which works similar to Java except that, it works only on MS Windows platforms.
    Which plays an important role in the MS .net strategy.
    C# has some language constructs copied from VB, C++ and our own Java. I would say, with my limited knowledge, there is 60-75% of compatibility between Java and C#. I was wondering, if any body from Java community have looked into this aspect at all.

    I would suggest the theserverside community to take look at the C sharp lang. spec. Its one of its kind, just a mis mash of various technologies/languages and they call C#.

    I have made specific notes like parameter passing, syntax, some concepts boxing and unboxing, event handling mechanisms which is very much similar to how java handles.




  6. Hi Sudhendra,

    > I would say, with my limited knowledge, there
    > is 60-75% of compatibility between Java and C#.
    > I was wondering, if any body from Java community
    > have looked into this aspect at all.

    I'm not form the Java community, but i think that this article can provide some lights :

    http://www.codeproject.com/csharp/sharphsql.asp

    It's about the port of Java HypersonicSQL to C# and .NET. You can directly jump to the conclusion.

    Regards,
    Christophe Lauer
  7. J2EE versus .NET Web Services[ Go to top ]

    THe following statement from the article

    "Windows DNA includes many proven technologies that are in production today, including Microsoft Transaction Server (MTS) and COM+, Microsoft Message Queue (MSMQ), and the Microsoft SQL Server database."


    "PROVEN TECHNOLOGIES"....hahahhahahahah

    MSMQ is not a proven technology (product)...MQSeries is....
    MTS is optimized for stateless objects....limited
    SQL Server......its getting there..not bad..best bang for the buck..move on Oracle/IBM

    BY THE WAY ...All microsoft technologies are integrated with IIS only...ASP implementations (i.e. chilli) are
    limited

  8. J2EE versus .NET Web Services[ Go to top ]

    Comparing on the following points:

    Scalability - At par. MS was behind couple of years back, but with Windows 2000 they have caught up. (and left most behind, if TPC benchmarks are to be belived)

    Reliability - At par. Again MS was behind and again they have caught up. Hardware vendors offer three 9s uptime on Win2k datacenter server. Win2k server and advanced server are not far behind.

    Performance - J2EE lags behind. Reason is simple - MS products are focused on Windows and take advantage of the OS. Other producs, being targeted across OS would have that layer of abstraction that would hit perf. Check out the Nile benchmarks.

    Architectural Finesse - At par. One point that J2EE lacks is the concept of context. AspectJ was something similar. What happened to it?

    Portability - There is no portability with .NET. My ques - where is portability important? If one is in product development - making them available on diff OS makes sense. But solutions? Web Sites? Web Services? I think issues like platform are chosen way before a line of code is written. Once chosen, I would like to take full advantage of the platform. Nobody whisks away the OS from under a solution and replaces it with another one.

    Standards support - At par.

    Opennes - It boils down to JCP vs. ECMA. On Dec 13, CLI - the spec(s) defining the .NET framework were standardized by ECMA. C# too.

    Vision: MS is certainly ahead - it was MS + Developmentor that created SOAP, it was again MS that lead UDDI and WSDL (MS precursors were DISCO and SCL).

    Ability to Execute - At par. Gartner has actually put MS ahead, IBM comes second.

    Cost - MS certainly do keep the cost low.

    my 0.02
  9. J2EE versus .NET Web Services[ Go to top ]

    Hi Vineet,

    I assume you are just joking, but I'll respond anyway.

    Scalability is about more than being able to run Windows on an 8-CPU machine. Clustering is about more than having a back-up server and having to use one of the three software packages that support Microsoft clustering. Windows is not vertically scalable (8 CPU max unless you go custom), and the Microsoft approach to horizontal scale is seriously flawed (4-way cluster max, and you must choose either failover _or_ scale).

    Reliability is about more than having your desktop or notebook run for a few days without crashing. While most of the reliability problems with Windows are the faults of the driver-writers working for the hardware vendors, it still hurts Microsoft's credibility. This is an area where Microsoft has definitely improved (since the debacle that was NT) but they still have a _long_ way to go to catch up to the laboriously boring but rock solid Unixes.

    Performance is about more than having a fast desktop CPU. If you look at Intel servers, they are about 1Ghz behind the desktop CPUs (2.2Ghz P-IVs vs. 1+Ghz P-IIIs). No one uses the P-IV for a server, and the server version at 1.7Ghz is slower than the 1Ghz P-III. For small load applications (i.e. those that don't require scalability, or that can scale horizontally by adding commodity Windows hardware, such as IIS behind a load balancer), Microsoft's platform is plenty quick, no doubt about it. To say that it is noticably faster than the Linuxes or Unixes is pretty silly though, and that is particularly true under load.

    Architectural finesse? Are you kidding me?

    Portability is about choice. If you don't want that choice, then feel free to go with Microsoft solutions. There's nothing particulary wrong with doing that, as long as you feel comfortable explaining that to your shareholders and customers.

    Standards support is a hot topic for debate. Microsoft makes the standards because of their overwhelming desktop influence. Consider all the hacks into the Apache project to handle weirdnesses introduced by IE. So Microsoft, in one way, is the standard, regardless of anything else. Regarding network protocols etc., Microsoft has done as good (or as bad) a job as most companies in supporting / implementing the standards. However, Java is the standard in the enterprise now, and so Microsoft is completely non-standard in terms of being applicable to enterprise development. We've done work with probably 20 of the Fortune 100 in the past 12 months and none of them are even looking at .Net for enterprise apps because of this cavalier approach.

    Openness is about more than shoving a pile of nothing through ECMA. Give me a friggin' break. Six years ago I had the full sources to Sun's Java.

    Since you believe that Microsoft's vision is better, I'd suggest that you like Microsoft's vision. Good for you. Blackbird anyone?

    Ability to execute is not missing in Microsoft's case, but neither is it in most of the top vendors in the industry.

    Cost of anything that Microsoft is losing in is low. That's called leveraging a monopoly, and that's why Microsoft has been in big trouble with the US government and the EU for the past decade or so. The real cost to consumers is much higher, because they each have a $170-$500 "tax" placed on their computer purchases to pay for Microsoft's failed enterprise vision and the US DOJ's inability to execute.

    Peace,

    Cameron.
  10. J2EE versus .NET Web Services[ Go to top ]

    <quote>
    Portability - There is no portability with .NET. My ques - where is portability important? If one is in product development - making them available on diff OS makes sense. But solutions? Web Sites? Web Services? I think issues like platform are chosen way before a line of code is written. Once chosen, I would like to take full advantage of the platform. Nobody whisks away the OS from under a solution and replaces it with another one.
    </quote>

    Never mind the details, due to performance problems with W2K's thread management, I have recently switched the OS on our mission critical 4-way Intel hardware from NT to Linux. I just put in the Linux version of the ORB and compiled the CORBA service! Let aside binary compatibility, even source-level portability is a good thing.

    And sometimes, MS itself does whisk away the OS from under a solution and replaces it with another one.

    Being a MS Premier support client, we were forced to switch our 35-strong 2/4-way WinNT park to W2K after MS noted that it would not be supporting WinNT after September. We paid the "grahzny bratchnies" in MCS big bucks to "consult" in planning the switch.

    First victims were the IIS 4.0 WebClass applications. They went awry so bad, we were getting errors such that the error codes were not to be found in any MS documentation. Do a search on Google for 0x800A9C68 (that one was the toughest to crack). MFC applications started printing garbage, instead of Turkish. Developers were taking sick leaves when they heard any one of the words OEM, ANSI and Unicode. Then we switched the PDC and almost half the 8000 intranet clients came to a virtual halt, as we learned that the new, improved user management limited the number of users in a domain to 5000 and the MCS supplied app to migrate the user hive silently ignored the errors (actually, it logged them but failed to report them, as it turned out). As you would imagine, I had a lot to say to the PS technical account manager.

    The NT->W2K switch was more of an effort than the NT->Linux switch. Why? With the service we were ready for porting to a different OS, the technology allowed it. With the MFC clients and the WebClass applications we were taking advantage of the platform!
  11. J2EE versus .NET Web Services[ Go to top ]

    with regards to peoples comments about .NET not being portable... From what I've read, there is a company working on a port for Linux. I can't back that up with a url, but when the ports to Linux, Unix, Mac, OS/390 start coming out, a lot of company's will be running scared. You'll probably start seeing more serious marketing campaigns attacking microsoft. Also keep in mind, that not only will the .NET CLR be portable, but the languages will be interchangeable, thanks to the CLS (comman language spec.). So, if need be a Java developer can easily switch to writing C# code for Linux. Which should be good news for all Java, Microsoft developers. Just think of the career opportunties that will exists out there.
  12. J2EE versus .NET Web Services[ Go to top ]

    Hi Wayne,

    Wayne: "with regards to peoples comments about .NET not being portable... From what I've read, there is a company working on a port for Linux. I can't back that up with a url, ..."

    .NET is not being ported to anything. A portion of the CLR is supposedly being ported to FreeBSD by a partner of Microsoft, and announcements have been made that the CLR is being implemented on Linux under GPL by at least two "open source" companies.

    Wayne: "... but when the ports to Linux, Unix, Mac, OS/390 start coming out, a lot of company's will be running scared."

    OK. Whatever. I'm still waiting for my DirectX for Unix that Microsoft promised me back five or six years ago. I'm still waiting for my ODBC for Unix that they promised me. My COM support for Unix. My DCOM support for Unix. Look, the first couple of times that you bought their promises and they didn't deliver on, that wasn't your fault, but now ....

    Peace,

    Cameron.