A group of Java vendors have gotten together to form a "Java Tools Community". The group was initiated by Oracle and Sun and looks to create an interoperable Java ecosystem of tool frameworks based on open standards, according to the project's sources.
- Posted by: Dion Almaer
- Posted on: November 24 2003 10:41 EST
The effort would rally around JSR 198, The Standard Extension API for IDEs, which could allow developers to write one plugin that would work with multiple IDEs. The group is still negotiating with Borland and IBM to get them on board.
BEA and Compuware have signed on, joining Sun and Oracle, and talks with other vendors are ongoing.
Java Tool Vendors Unite in Battle Against .Net
JSR 198: A Standard Extension API for Integrated Development Environments
- Java Tools Community Forming by Eric Ma on November 24 2003 11:29 EST
- What a Joke - The Java Cartel Process (JCP) Is Dead by Gerald Bauer on November 24 2003 12:26 EST
- Java Tools Community Forming by George de la Torre on November 24 2003 13:48 EST
- Java Tools Community Forming by Kapil Israni on November 24 2003 14:46 EST
- Oracle JDeveloper by Michael Gallagher on November 24 2003 14:55 EST
- Workshop > IDE by Matt Gunter on November 24 2003 17:36 EST
- I think workshop is useful for building standards-based apps by Paul King on November 24 2003 18:32 EST
- A different recollection of the Java tools market by phil McLaughlin on November 25 2003 06:26 EST
- Shortest JSR ever by ac0dr on November 25 2003 05:06 EST
I am not surprised that Borland and IBM have not agreed to join because they have nothing to gain and everything to lose from the JSR. IBM thinks Eclipse should be the foundation of all Java tools (which may not be a bad idea), and their WSAD and Rational Java XDE are extensions to Eclispe. As for Borland, if the JSR goes through it can no longer charge 2 to 3 grand for an IDE, and the only product they can possibly push is the formerly-known Together ControlCenter, which TogetherSoft could not sell in any large volume before Borland acquired the company. In contrast, Oracle is very interested and actually submitted the JSR because it is not making money on JDeveloper anyways, and the JSR gives them a chance to sell some database-related plug-ins. BEA is interested because the JSR gives them a chance to make WebLogic WorkShop part of a standard, which helps them sell the WebLogic platform. And for Sun? I guess they will be involved in anything as long as it has the potential to help their non-existing Java software business.
So stay tuned.
I am not surprised that Borland and IBM have not agreed to join because they have nothing to gain and everything to lose from the JSR.
Don't be sure about that. Both IBM and Borland are part of the expert group for the JSR.
A group of Java vendors have gotten together to form a "Sun-Led Java Tools Cartel".
> The group was initiated by Oracle and Sun and looks to create an interoperable
> Java ecosystem of tool frameworks based on "open" standards, according to the
> project's sources.
What a joke. When will Sun realize that the Java Cartel Process (JCP) is dead. The integrity of the tech press as usual is a disgrace. They just keep on spreading the lies Sun feeds them.
For more background about Sun's duplicity about "community" and "open" standards check out the Viva! site online at http://viva.sourceforge.net
PS: Anyone wants to reread the tech press stories about Sun pondering to join Eclipse.
SUN and Oracle are leading the "Java Tools Community" movement. BEA and Compuware has joined in as well. These vendors IDEs, IMO, have everything to win and nothing to loose.
The article claims:
"Several leading Java tool vendors are building an organization to link their respective frameworks in an effort to offer an alternative to Microsoft Corp.'s .Net framework and Visual Studio tools."
Really, SUN and Oracle are leading tool vendors? Look, if these companies really wanted to offer an alternative to Microsoft's Visual Studio tools, then let me suggest to Oracle - DEPART THE JAVA TOOL MARKET!
Oracle's dismal Java tool offerings along with their deceptive marketing are hurting the Java community far more than Microsoft is.
SUN's Java IDE, NetBeans is not so leading as well, but at least SUN doesn't bombard the public with deceptive marketing like Oracle.
The article goes on to say,
"IBM and Borland, however, have little to gain by joining such an effort, as both companies have thriving Java tools businesses. Sun, Oracle and BEA are playing catch-up."
I'm sure SUN, Oracle and BEA would have different positions if they were the current Java IDE market leaders.
The "Java Tools Community" is a little late; this movement would've been fair before any Java IDE tool was developed.
You can't trust Oracle's Ted Farrell agenda, Ted, was Chief Technical Officer of WebGain, Inc, remember VisualCafe, the IDE that lost out to JBuilder. Besides, when has Oracle ever provided any innovation to the Java community?
Now, Ted is representing Oracle for open standards - don't think they're kidding anyone.
I think BEA lost all credibility for pushing a proprietary Java IDE, WorkShop. BEA should be part of the "Java Tools Community" only because of their application Server, Weblogic; however, with only a minority voting influence. How can a company like BEA have two products that are 180 degrees differnece in philosophy? Weblogic promoting and delivering on J2EE specifications and WorkShop promoting who knows what...
IBM is the funny one here. Their first Java IDE, VisualAge, was a failure. Now IBM's free Java IDE, Eclipse is supposedly the "Java Tools Community". However, IBM's Eclipse is not without fanfare. Eclipse was built with its own graphic and widget toolkit (SWT), not the Java standard (SWING). IBM claimed SWING was inadequate; of course, SUN accused IBM of fragmenting Java. A lot of smart people thinks IBM's application server, WebSphere is inadequate, so why doesn't IBM rewrite it?
Well, give Borland credit for taking out VisualCafe and VisualAge. These IDEs weren't that bad, VisualCafe was strife with bad management. VisualAge was written in Smalltalk, didn't think IBM had the Java clue back then. VisualAge was at the end of its life cycle, no time to rewrite and compete. IBM's only answer was for a "Java Tools Community" strategy called Eclipse.
Also, give credit to IntelliJ IDEA for raising the bar with Java IDEs.
Yes, it seems the "loser community" wants to start an "open community"...
<quote>A lot of smart people thinks IBM's application server, WebSphere is inadequate</quote>
Smart people, cant debate that, but have they actually used the product. I dont "think" so. But then its just my "thinking", as was theirs.
Or may be their thought process and yours is based on WAS 3.5 or even 4.0
Can you provide more detail regarding Oracle's JDeveloper? Especially anything regarding "deceptive marketing". I am involved in a decision regarding using these tools as opposed to Eclipse. I favor Eclipse, but any info you can provide regarding JDeveloper would be much appreciated.
If you are looking for more details on JDeveloper check out http://otn.oracle.com/products/jdev for all the technical info.
Make sure the version you check is Oracle JDeveloper 10g, to see where the tool is heading with its visual and declarative approach to J2EE development.
This page will give you some online demos:
"Can you provide more detail regarding Oracle's JDeveloper? Especially anything regarding "deceptive marketing"."
My experience with JDeveloper and Oracle9iAS started around May 2003. A very important client of mine uses Oracle database for most of their systems. This client wanted to start developing Web based (J2EE) enterprise applications. This client also spent a lot of money training their staff with Oracle's training consultants, thus, my client selected Oracle J2EE offerings.
Well, because of my experience with J2EE, primarily with Borland Enterprise Server and Weblogic I participated to help my client develop and use Oracle's J2EE products. Although, I had no Oracle tool experience, I was comfortable with Java and the J2EE specifications.
JDeveloper's free price was somewhat confusing, a "free" download didn't mean a free developers license.
My client had JDeveloper copies everywhere; I had a difficult time trying to convince them they were using illegal copies.
JDeveloper's production release? JDeveloper has been mostly in pre-release mode, most organization will not allow a software project to start with a beta product.
Oracle was always touting next release promised features, very difficult to discern current release from beta. Thus, the Oracle9iAS 9.02 was production release at the time and it wasn't EJB 2.0 compliant. But, JDeveloper had the OC4J 9.03 application server package.
JDeveloper and Oracle9iAS support for LDAP was impossible. It took a lot of undocumented "hacking" to get LDAP standards to work. Oracle bundle their own JAZN libraries extensions to JAAS. Furthermore, Oracle only supported their own Oracle Internet Directory services over others.
Well, I couldn't use any standard LDAP libraries for Oracle's tools. In fact, Oracle Internet Directory services were extremely buggy and useless.
My client needed to use XSLT to process XML files for Web pages and XSL:FO for PDF outputs. So, I used Cocoon for this solution previously with no problem, using Oracle tools was a nightmare.
Another "hacking" session was required to re-wire Oracle's XML libraries to make popular Apache libs to work!
JDeveloper's production stable release is non-existent, Oracle will announce a next digit developers release before addressing the current problems.
Please, just take some time and look at the history of JDeveloper's release timetables for your self. This is the marketing deception I'm talking about.
look at Oracle's white papers, how these papers overlap release propaganda. For instance, Oracle has always touted things like single sign-on through JAAS, LDAP standards support, Full J2EE standard support, XML technologies features, etc, but always with Oracle proprietary libraries in place.
Please, don't just take my word on this, do your due-diligence with researching Oracle's tech forums.
As I promote J2EE technology, it is difficult to state my case against Microsoft's FUD campaign. Thus, I don't appreciate a vendor out to make J2EE technology look bad.
"How can a company like BEA have two products that are 180 degrees differnece in philosophy? Weblogic promoting and delivering on J2EE specifications and WorkShop promoting who knows what... "
Many of the innovations included in Workshop are being standardized:
JSRs: 207(process definitions for java), 175 (metadata for java), 181(annotated Java syntax for programming Web Services), 168 (portlets) , struts(apache project), xmlbeans(apache project).
Moreover, Workshop goes beyond normal IDE's by providing a runtime framework that greatly simplifies application modeling and development-without the familiar negative side-effects of code generation. The productivity benefits are truly amazing.....
I think BEA lost all credibility for pushing a proprietary Java IDE, WorkShop.
I thought this too until I started using workshop in a production project.
To do some specific things in Struts you need to use the many struts
extension points. As soon as you have used one of those arguably you
have developed an appl'n which doesn't abide by standards. It makes
a lot of sense to use a set of extensions which have been production
hardened - and that is what workshop gives you.
I'll admit that I would like more doco and it would be good if BEA
released parts of workshop's source but I find just as many things
which annoy me about JDeveloper and WSAD and they aren't quite yet
as productive as workshop.
George de la Torre wrote:
[Much Ranting deleted]
> Oracle's dismal Java tool offerings along with their deceptive marketing are hurting the Java community far more than Microsoft is.
Ok I am biased because I now work for Oracle But JDev is a great IDE
Dowload it and try it for yourselves or attend a Developer Day (check the OTN site) and see for yourself
TopLink is stilll the best approach to persistence management on the market
This hurts the Java community how ?
> IBM is the funny one here. Their first Java IDE, VisualAge, was a failure.
By what standard ? - VAJ was a brilliant product offering a level of tool and framework capability that many of todays IDEs are only just coming close to. VAJs problem was the rate at which SUN changed the Java Language itself. The Smalltalk VM on which VAJ was based was (and still is because its still a viable Smalltalk tool) stable and reliable. It was the shenanigans with java itself that cuased the problems with VAJ (that and a whole bunch of C programmers who switched syntax to Java but couldnt cope with a truly OO environment ;-)). Eclipse is rightly seen as the successor to Visual age and is a good tool.
> Well, give Borland credit for taking out VisualCafe and VisualAge.
Visual Cafe died with WebGain & that was mostly bad management and leadership (ok it was a poor IDE too ;-) but webgain were still selling the product even when they were wrapped up. Visual Age died because Java Changed too rapidly and so many newbies who only understood file based development in C just couildt cope with its object based development environment
Borland have a fine product but they didnt 'take out' these products
> Also, give credit to IntelliJ IDEA for raising the bar with Java IDEs.
no argument with that
> Yes, it seems the "loser community" wants to start an "open community"...
One - most of the current IDEs offer similar capabilities so really youre looking at Price performance and niche capabilities - for example JDevelopers Web Services wizards for PL/SQL are unique
Two An Open community is an excellent Idea - MS does represent a threat in the middleware market and better development tools and interoperability are a significant addition to the argument
"please go to http://help.eclipse.org/help20/help.jsp"