Parody: Forrester concludes that Linux/J2EE causes colon cancer

Discussions

News: Parody: Forrester concludes that Linux/J2EE causes colon cancer

  1. This post is a parody on recent news about a Microsoft-sponsored Forrester/Giga report claiming that Windows/.NET development is 25/28% cheaper than Linux/J2EE.

    News Flash:

    A Forrester research project, funded by Microsoft inc., has determined that developing software using a Linux/J2EE development environment increases a developer's risk of dying from colon cancer by up to 40% over the risk when developing with Microsoft's .Net technology. The universally acclaimed Forrester researchers, Dun Bought and Wel Paidfer, who conducted the study, describe their ground breaking research as: "a first important step toward shinning a light on a place that was dark"

    "Although our sample size was admittedly small; we interviewed 12 developers: 7 of which worked with Microsoft development products, and 5 of which worked with Linux/J2EE, we still believe that our findings are indicative of real risks that developers should weigh carefully before making any brash development decisions; especially any decision that would exclude the most powerful, insightful, and well respected software company in the world." Explains Mr. Bought.
     
    "This is just one more item that should go through your mind before you decide to jump off the Linux/J2EE cliff” continues Mr. Paidfer, "Along with all the technical problems you are sure to face, you may possibly suffer a horrific and painful death"

    "Of course we are totally unbiased, so if you feel like hanging yourself with Linux/J2EE, there may be a perfectly valid reason to do so; our research is looking at only a very specific aspect of software development" stresses Mr. Bought.

    Bought and Paidfer scoff at allegations, raised by a few radical open source supporters, that their research may be biased. "It is infuriating that anyone would question our motives, just because we are funded by Microsoft. In fact, I can assure you that we are, without a doubt, the most unbiased analysts on Microsoft’s payroll" exclaims Bought.

    "Yeah, were not anything like Enderle or Didio," protests Mr. Paidfer, "The fact that our study was commissioned by Microsoft has absolutely nothing to do with its findings. If those Linux hippies had scraped together enough money to commission a study from us, we would still have found in favor of MS" said Bought

    "Absolutely" added Paidfer, "It is merely a coincidence that Microsoft happens to have the best vision and the deepest pockets".

    Despite their demeanor of unbiased professionalism, a few industry outsiders have questioned the methodology employed by Bought and Paidfer. "The fact that all five Linux/J2EE developers were members of LAGJUG (The Los Alamos Geriatric Java Users Group) raises some suspicions in my mind" remarked one such developer, who wished to remain anonymous, claiming fear of Microsoft retaliation.
      
    "I just don't see how you can compare the LAGJUG developers to the Chief Seattle High chapter of FUDWUG (Future Developers of Windows Users Group) and come up with any meaningful numbers, asked another, equally fearful open source developer.

    Despite the doubts, raised by a few industry discontents, it is clear that the vast majority of the IT industry, including all of its most venerable analysts, have accepted the Forrester findings at face value. "Better get ready for a colostomy bag if you’re using Linux" chuckled SCO's acclaimed CEO, Mr. Darl McFried.

    Threaded Messages (29)

  2. Excellent!!!
  3. Make Customer Happy[ Go to top ]

    I think one of the Motto of Forrester must be to 'Make Customer Happy'.

    Did they include the cost of shutdown due to Viruses :)

    PS: My opinion is not funded by Mircrosoft, Sun, IBM or RHAT :)
  4. IBM's currently dealing with allegations that conditions at their labs caused engineers to develop cancer. Whatever issues you might want to raise about how objective the Forrester report is, I think this parody is pretty tasteless in light of that situation.
  5. A point on the nature of satire[ Go to top ]

    Satire is a literary form in which human vice, folly, and hypocrisy is exposed through the use of irony.

    A parody is a form of satire in which imitation is used to ridicule another work. The purpose of writing a parody is to demonstrate the absurdities inherent in the parodied work.

    With this in mind, I would like to point out that that my parody of the Forrester Groups research methods is in no way "degrading" to people who suffer from cancer; just as Jonathon Swift was in no way "degrading" people who had been the victims of cannibalism when he published "A Modest Proposal". He merely wished to demonstrate, using satire, the appalling and absurd way in which the poor and downtrodden were treated by many of his contemporaries.

    If you are having difficulty understanding the purpose of this article, or are otherwise confused as to the nature and purpose of satire, I would recommend that you pick up a work by Swift. There is every possibility that doing so will lead to a more full and enriched existence. A sense of humor is a terrible thing to waste,

    Regards,
    Joe Jenkins
  6. A point on the nature of satire[ Go to top ]

    I take great offense at your condescending approach and callous disregard of the obvious painful suffering of others. Have you no decency, sir?

    This hoax you have maliciously perpetrated on us all is an affront to decent, humorless, politically correct technologists the world over. I demand - no, insist! - you apologize immediately and publicly. No other course of action will save you from my deeply felt self-righteous condemnation.

    In fact, I feel one whopper of a headache coming on now, doubtless due completely to the intense stress and anxiety I have been forced to endure by witlessly reading your "satire". I may even be experiencing an anxiety attack now. Or is that just a heart attack?

    Anyway, the point is that you have cruelly exploited the utter lack of humor I and many other software engineers are famous for. I hope you are satisfied. If this keeps up I may even develop any number of inoperable, horribly disfiguring diseases. All because you wanted to make a joke. A joke at our expense.

    You should be overwhelmed with relentless waves of anguish and remorse right about now. Ta ta.
  7. Thank You[ Go to top ]

    Thank you for an excellent parody of the critique of my parody. I just hope that nobody parodies this response to the parody of the critique of my parody, because doing so could result in dangerous levels of nested parodies that may inflict irreparable harm to those suffering from chronic humorlessness ;)
  8. Microsoft[ Go to top ]

    Ok. I think I'll be called a zealot for what I´m about to say... I´ve been developing systems for some years now, and my findings about Ms VS any other thing are that indeed, if you generally consider only the developers cost, MS developers are cheaper (thanks God, I´m not one of them anymore). However, they´re generally far less qualified about computer science basics, thanks to the very nature of Ms Products. On the long run, it increases the project´s cost, because of bad decisions and the lack of... abstraction.

    But, anyway, developer´s cost is only one of many factors that must be considered when calculating project costs.

    Andre
  9. MS developers[ Go to top ]

    I too have similar experience. When it comes to importing excel to SQL server they are good. But when analytical decison is required they increases cost due to different perspective. So long run J2EE developer on .net are better then VB developer.
  10. Yes, we should be suspicious when companies pay Forrester or TMC to conduct 'unbiased' studies that can't be released without the sponsoring corporation's consent.

    But the conclusions reached by the report don't seem terribly mendacious. The analysts determined that there were two major reasons why projects had lower delivery costs on .NET than J2EE:

    1) The Oracle and BEA license costs were four times what the license costs were for the equivalent Microsoft platform. Is this difficult to believe? BEA lists their full application platform at $90,000 per CPU, and Oracle lists their enterprise database at $40,000 per CPU. You can brand me as morally indecent for pointing this out, or you might consider that this sort of pricing makes J2EE less competitive in a broad range of environments.

    2) It took three months longer to deliver the J2EE solution than it did to deliver the equivalent .NET solution. Is this also so difficult to believe? I think most of us agree that J2EE provides the better option for complex development tasks, but most of us also agree that J2EE development environments are more complex than the .NET environments for smaller projects. Once again, I think the report underscores a legitimate threat to J2EE competitiveness for small to medium projects.
  11. Corby,

    It´s interesting they mention Oracle and BEA. I think the word here is scability. J2EE is not inherently more complex than .NET projects. But if you go with Oracle, BEA, Sun or IBM, and their design blueprints, than it´ll be more complex, and worst, more costful. Of course, some times you do need to use this designs, due to the complexity of some tasks. But most of time, you don´t need it.

    For small to medium projects, we can use a lot of open source tools like Ant, Eclipse, JBoss, Tomcat, that are easy to use, and costs a lot less than the big names you said. Of course, there´s no marketing for this tools, and even the available docs aren´t that thing, but it can be solved.

    And I think, having used both technologies, that these tools offer a lot more possibilities than .NET - of course, I´m not talking about WISWYG.

    I apologize, most of this have been discussed a lot before in TS, and I don´t want to start another flame war.

    Andre
  12. 1)The Oracle and BEA license costs were four times what the license costs were for the equivalent Microsoft platform. Is this difficult to believe? BEA lists their full application platform at $90,000 per CPU, and Oracle lists their enterprise database at $40,000 per CPU. You can brand me as morally indecent for pointing this out, or you might consider that this sort of pricing makes J2EE less competitive in a broad range of environments.

    There are other app servers and databases (even SQL Server) out there, including solid open source implementations. (You can often get discounts off the retail price of these beasts as well.) And let us not forget that most applications probably only require a servlet container. Also don't forget that the quality of these products also affects price in terms of deploying and maintaining applications. The .Net platform needs more choice in vendors, otherwise it will not be competitive price-wise.

    2) It took three months longer to deliver the J2EE solution than it did to deliver the equivalent .NET solution. Is this also so difficult to believe? I think most of us agree that J2EE provides the better option for complex development tasks, but most of us also agree that J2EE development environments are more complex than the .NET environments for smaller projects. Once again, I think the report underscores a legitimate threat to J2EE competitiveness for small to medium projects.

    Your assertion is false and not based in reality (in my experience with both platforms). J2EE is only more complex than .Net if you use the wrong J2EE technologies for the job. This is the only real trap, but it is the price we pay for such a rich platform. If you are creating a distributed application, complexity abounds on both platforms (but at least you have a choice of implementations with J2EE).

    Reports like these are really quite useless. Don't even bother reading them, because they are not impartial and come from people who are not grounded in reality. These are harsh words, but they are true. Try them both and decide for yourself.
  13. Just to complete about the database: What did Microsoft offer to compete with Oracle? Ms Sql Server. If we are talking about high-end applications here, I don´t think it has enough power. At least in my experience, SQL Server simply can´t handle a large number of transactions and data.
  14. Ever seen this site...

    http://www.tpc.org/
  15. Corby,

    Bill is somewhat correct in his rebuttal of your first point. However, it is rare that people like yourself are able to convince people like William to go with open source solutions over heavy license costs (maybe...WS).

    Bill,

    Your counterclaim of Corby's 2nd assertion appears to be based on your knowledge/experience of both platforms. For the rare breed of developer who has a thorough understanding of each platform (which I have and Corby does not...I know him), your perspective holds true. It is easy to introduce a great deal of complexity into both the .Net and J2EE worlds. This is in direct contrast to the larger community of .Net development where complexity (factories, flyweights & such) is shunned. Perception is reality for most and
    MS (specifically their powerful joystick VS.net) truly does attempt to stear the average .Net developer to a simplistic view of the world.

    Ultimately, I do believe that J2EE has a significant threat to small-medium projects from .net. Why else would Sun devise marketing and products aimed at this segment of developers...
  16. However, it is rare that people like yourself are able to convince people like William to go with open source solutions over heavy license costs (maybe...WS).

    I'm not really trying to convince anyone. Besides, how can you convince people who don't listen? Licensing costs are not that bad when you are dealing with distributed applications (much better than a couple of years ago and getting better). Your up-front costs will be extremely low when developing most applications (that are not distributed). J2EE will cost you much less up front because of the choices you have. As I stated earlier, unless the .Net platform offers more choice (including competitive open source options), it will not be able to compete in price or quality. That's just a fact of life and something that managers (who make choices based more on perception) don't understand or care about.

    Your counterclaim of Corby's 2nd assertion appears to be based on your knowledge/experience of both platforms. For the rare breed of developer who has a thorough understanding of each platform (which I have and Corby does not...I know him), your perspective holds true. It is easy to introduce a great deal of complexity into both the .Net and J2EE worlds. This is in direct contrast to the larger community of .Net development where complexity (factories, flyweights & such) is shunned. Perception is reality for most and
    MS (specifically their powerful joystick VS.net) truly does attempt to stear the average .Net developer to a simplistic view of the world.


    It doesn't require a thorough understanding of both platforms to know that distributed applications involve tough decisions and more complexity - regardless of the technology you use. The good news (sorry to keep harping on this) is that most applications should not be designed and developed to be distributed. It is simply overkill. The problem with J2EE is that it is much easier (and used to be almost encouraged) to make this mistake.

    Ultimately, I do believe that J2EE has a significant threat to small-medium projects from .net. Why else would Sun devise marketing and products aimed at this segment of developers...

    Microsoft is capable of generating a great deal of buzz around their technologies, and they have a lot of money to back it up. At this point, where the .Net platform and surrounding community is still very immature, that is really the threat. And since most developers are relatively green and managers listen intently to analysts and the media, this is a very real threat in the near term. That is why Sun must be diligent in its marketing efforts. Superior technologies don't win on technical grounds alone - they must also be marketed properly.
  17. Humor aside, I think this is a very interesting pattern.

    Microsoft (and other large technology vendors) pays "independent" analyst firms to do these studies and write these reports. Three recent ones from Microsoft come to mind...

    -Petstore comparison of J2EE and .NET

    -Doculabs recent Web services comparison

    -This Forrester report

    All funded my Microsoft and guess who came out on top??? Best technology, pure coincidence or opinions for hire? You decide...

    Eric
  18. Disgusting and daft![ Go to top ]

    Makes a mockery of the many people who are actually suffering from colon-cancer. I think it is pretty daft of Forrester to publish this so called "parody" and it shows very poor taste.
  19. My first reaction when I read the tiltle of this article was: is today April 1?

    Perfecting J2EE!
  20. My first reaction when I read the tiltle of this article was: is today April 1?

    >
    > Perfecting J2EE!

    Super...
  21. Studies hold little value[ Go to top ]

    I once worked for a small startup that paid one of these big research firms to conduct a study on the market space surrounding this company's business plan. Ironically, the findings of the study did not yield the desired results therefore angering the CEO/Founder and his cronies(read: the rest of the high and mighty C* level). Being that the research disproved the very ideas on which the company was founded and running (not to mention being a complete slap in the face of the brilliant CEO), these intellectual heavyweights needed a solution. After all, this study cost the company a good bag of loot and they had already went about telling anyone who would listen that the research company was currently conducting a study of this market space that will prove that the business plan was sound (and that the CEO was brilliant) and that the company was ahead of the game. Anyway, to make a long story short, the solution to this dilemma was to negotiate a price with the research firm to change the results of the study to be in their favor rendering the true research useless.

    IMO, the only research that is truly honest and independent is that conducted by a university. Most studies by universities are conducted by someone writing a thesis or something similar and they've usually got little to nothing at stake. The fact that this study was funded by Microsoft says it all.

    I especially like the satirical delivery. The holier than thou attitude conveyed throughout the piece just reaks of the entire Bush administration. Of course, this is no surprise whatsoever. After all, the two are in bed together.
  22. A Challenge to Forrester[ Go to top ]

    I would like to challenge Forrester to make public the number of commissioned studies that they have performed for paying clients that resulted in a negative conclusion. This number will shed a lot of light on the worth that should be attributed to their research.

    Even if they were to demonstrate that they produced a negative result in a reasonable number of their commissioned studies (which I am almost positive they do not), there is another problem inherent in their method of conducting research. If a paying customer has the right not to publish the findings of research whenever it turns out to be negative, then any "well to do" company can simply commission large numbers of studies, publishing the ones that turn out well for them, and discarding the rest.

    I am confident, however, that few companies will ever have to resort to such expensive methods of generating good PR. The notion that the researchers, who know that the client is paying them in the hopes of producing a good report, will not unconsciously bias their methodology, and thus their findings, in favor of their client is in denial with regards to the nature of human psychology.

    I have witnessed the farce of a commissioned study from a first person perspective, and I am sure that there are many others out there that have had the same experience. That commissioned studies continue to play an important role in generating content for the IT press, and thus in influencing IT managers, is detrimental to the entire IT industry.
  23. Is Microsoft Really Less Expensive Than Linux?:
    http://comment.cio.com/soundoff/091103.html
  24. TSS rocks[ Go to top ]

    Considering how much mud slinging about the Pet Store/Pet Shop benchmark was going on here last year, it is really nice to see that The Server Side has a sense of humor about itself. Well done, guys.

    -Frank Cohen
    http://www.pushtotest.com/ptt
    TestNetwork 1.1 now shipping
  25. MS IIS declining[ Go to top ]

    http://www.netcraft.com/survey/Reports/200308/graphs.html


    Apache still grows, and IIS declines steadily. All this noise is pure concentrated FUD.
  26. Complex visual studio.net[ Go to top ]

    Hi
    Iam a tools evaluator and i worked for a client on(c#) and a server side
    Java(axis)..
     Some of my findings
       1.c# is only a little faster compared to java in client side
       2.c# is growing complex
       3.jBuilder /Jdeveloper have the same wizard functionalities as VS.NET
       4. VS.NET can't match Intellij Idea in any of the aspects
       5.jre size is almost 10 mb less than .net 1.1 release
    -Gk.Sezhian
  27. MS IIS declining[ Go to top ]

    Jamine,

    + 1!

    .V
  28. Antother study points out that it is very expensive to take the bus.
    A private limousine is a lot cheaper.

    Limousine : 120 $

    Bus : 3$

    But you have to include all the aside expenses :

    Bus :
  29. Another study points out that it is very expensive to take the bus.
    A private limousine is a lot cheaper.

    Limousine : 120 $

    Bus : 3$

    But you have to include all the aside expenses :

    Bus :
    - cup of champagne and "petit four" delivered in the bus (special delivery) : 85 $
    - massage (to eliminate the back pains due to the relative inconfort) : 50 $
    - psychologist : 105 $ (to overcome the stress due to the crowdy bus).

    Limousine :
    - cup of champagne : included
    - massage : not needed f(the limousine is very confortable)
    - psychologist : not needed (the limousine is far from being crowdy).

    Results :
    - limousine : 120$
    - bus : 243$

    This very scientific demonstrates that the bus twice expensive than the limousine.

    If your boss is convinced by the forrester results, please require a limousine to go to work.
  30. Nice one[ Go to top ]

    So far, this article and the comments were the best items on my read-list today. Thanks, guys :)

    My only worry is companies like Forrester go with such statements in public and officially. Otherwise, this can start a nice amusing discussion among friends.