667514 members! Sign up to stay informed.

Sponsored Links


Resources

Enterprise Java
Research Library
Get Java white papers, product information, case studies and webcasts

News News News Messages: 300 Messages: 300 Messages: 300 Printer friendly Printer friendly Printer friendly Post reply Post reply Post reply XML XML XML

TMC Completes Massive IBM J2EE / .NET Study

Posted by: The Middleware Company on September 19, 2004 DIGG
The Middleware Company has completed a massive study comparing IBM WebSphere against Microsoft .NET across multiple dimensions: developer productivity, manageability, reliability, and application performance. This latest study is the most extensive research endeavor TMC has conducted to date.
 
For this study TMC assembled two independent teams, one for J2EE using IBM WebSphere, the other for Microsoft .NET. Each team received the same specification for a loosely-coupled system to be developed, deployed, tuned and tested in a controlled laboratory setting. The WebSphere team developed two different implementations of the specification, one using IBM’s model-driven tool Rational Rapid Developer (RRD), the other with IBM’s code-centric WebSphere Studio Application Developer (WSAD). The .NET team developed its single implementation using Visual Studio.NET as the primary development tool.

TMC recruited an independent auditor to design the specification, oversee the lab environment, enforce rules of engagement, and conduct validation tests. The auditor has issued an independent report along with his results.

In each of the following areas, the TMC report presents the quantitative results from the auditor as well as extensive, detailed descriptions of the teams’ experiences and insights:
  • How quickly the team could develop the system to spec and deploy it for functional testing
  • How quickly and accurately the team could configure and tune their system for performance
  • How well the system did on a series of performance tests
  • How easily the team could deploy changes under load
  • How well the system handled failover
How did IBM and J2EE do in their native environments? Did Microsoft .NET live up to expectations? Is this study conclusive?

To get these answers and to obtain the TMC final report, the independent auditor’s report, the system specification and the source code for the three implementations, go to:
http://www.middlewareresearch.com/endeavors/040921IBMDOTNET/endeavor.jsp

See eWeek's Article covering this study and results: http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1645550,00.asp

TheServerSide Editors’ Note: This research is produced and hosted by The Middleware Company, a research and media company, and the parent company of this site. TheServerSide.com and TheServerSide.NET are independent media sites of The Middleware Company and as such do not produce research themselves, and have no involvement in this study beyond providing this thread of discussion for your positive and negative comments alike, just as other media organizations have reported on it (eWEEK, InternetNews).

Threaded replies

·  TMC Completes Massive IBM J2EE / .NET Study by The Middleware Company on Sun Sep 19 21:48:36 EDT 2004
  ·  TMC Completes Massive IBM J2EE / .NET Study by Paul Rivers on Tue Sep 21 11:20:43 EDT 2004
    ·  TMC Completes Massive IBM J2EE / .NET Study by Julien Dubois on Tue Sep 21 11:32:12 EDT 2004
      ·  Keep in mind what the sponsor wanted... by Robert Dean on Tue Sep 21 11:53:47 EDT 2004
        ·  Keep in mind what the sponsor wanted... by Robert Dean on Tue Sep 21 12:06:02 EDT 2004
        ·  Keep in mind what the sponsor wanted... by Tero Vaananen on Tue Sep 21 12:14:52 EDT 2004
      ·  Well it pays for the website :-) by Neil Ellis on Tue Sep 21 12:06:19 EDT 2004
      ·  Can't do that by Vaino Vaher on Mon Nov 01 16:43:21 EST 2004
    ·  TMC Completes Massive IBM J2EE / .NET Study by Tyler Jewell on Tue Sep 21 11:34:44 EDT 2004
      ·  TMC Completes Massive IBM J2EE / .NET Study by Tero Vaananen on Tue Sep 21 11:51:50 EDT 2004
        ·  TMC Completes Massive IBM J2EE / .NET Study by Dino Chiesa on Tue Sep 21 12:08:35 EDT 2004
          ·  TMC Completes Massive IBM J2EE / .NET Study by javier castanon on Tue Sep 21 14:25:57 EDT 2004
            ·  Interesting Dino? by Dino Chiesa on Tue Sep 21 14:50:53 EDT 2004
              ·  Interesting Dino? by javier castanon on Tue Sep 21 19:06:50 EDT 2004
                ·  Interesting Dino? by Dino Chiesa on Tue Sep 21 20:44:52 EDT 2004
                  ·  Interesting Dino? by javier castanon on Tue Sep 21 22:54:34 EDT 2004
                    ·  WSAD vs VS.NET: Easier to start with = more productive ? by George Jiang on Wed Sep 22 00:43:11 EDT 2004
                      ·  WSAD vs VS.NET: Easier to start with = more productive ? by Steve Wilkes on Wed Sep 22 01:05:47 EDT 2004
                        ·  WSAD vs VS.NET: Easier to start with = more productive ? by George Jiang on Wed Sep 22 02:56:23 EDT 2004
                          ·  Re: WSAD vs VS.NET: Easier to start with = more productive ? by Craig Beattie on Wed Sep 22 06:56:09 EDT 2004
                  ·  Choices... by Lofi Dewanto on Wed Sep 22 03:37:10 EDT 2004
                ·  Security in ASP.NET and Mono by Edgar Sanchez on Wed Sep 22 00:51:28 EDT 2004
                  ·  Security in ASP.NET and Mono by javier castanon on Wed Sep 22 12:13:17 EDT 2004
                    ·  J2EE portability vs. .NET portability by Edgar Sanchez on Thu Sep 23 00:19:01 EDT 2004
                      ·  J2EE portability vs. .NET portability by javier castanon on Thu Sep 23 03:55:58 EDT 2004
      ·  This is another setup job from you guys by Paul O'Connor on Tue Sep 21 11:52:23 EDT 2004
      ·  What was that ? by Brian McKendrick on Thu Oct 21 18:54:57 EDT 2004
    ·  MS Marketing Machine by boni Kabs on Tue Sep 21 12:08:36 EDT 2004
      ·  Sun's J2EE Marketing by phil gibbs on Wed Sep 22 09:50:28 EDT 2004
      ·  Microsoft good at marketing??? by J. Sawyer on Wed Sep 22 18:25:38 EDT 2004
    ·  TMC Completes Massive IBM J2EE / .NET Study by Srinivas Dorairaj on Tue Sep 21 13:46:16 EDT 2004
      ·  VB/Visual Studio 6 != Visual Studio .NET by J. Sawyer on Wed Sep 22 18:33:52 EDT 2004
        ·  VB/Visual Studio 6 != Visual Studio .NET by peter lin on Wed Sep 22 19:00:54 EDT 2004
          ·  short update brush course by Rolf Tollerud on Wed Sep 22 19:33:01 EDT 2004
            ·  short update brush course by peter lin on Wed Sep 22 20:15:02 EDT 2004
              ·  short update brush course by Robin Boerdijk on Thu Sep 23 04:37:02 EDT 2004
    ·  Why this study is garbage by F U on Tue Sep 21 14:56:20 EDT 2004
      ·  Why this study is garbage - is it? by Dino Chiesa on Tue Sep 21 17:25:05 EDT 2004
        ·  Why this study is garbage - is it? by Hernan Parra on Tue Sep 21 18:07:06 EDT 2004
          ·  Are you the guy who works for Microsoft? by Dino Chiesa on Tue Sep 21 20:08:01 EDT 2004
          ·  VERY VERY Interesting! by M A on Wed Sep 22 02:37:19 EDT 2004
            ·  VERY VERY Interesting! by Dino Chiesa on Wed Sep 22 15:34:52 EDT 2004
    ·  Another "Get The FUD" nonsense from Microsoft by B B on Tue Sep 21 18:59:19 EDT 2004
    ·  What a technology realty show!! by YT Chen on Wed Sep 22 02:04:25 EDT 2004
      ·  Preaching to the congregation by Rolf Tollerud on Wed Sep 22 02:28:48 EDT 2004
    ·  No marks for Design by Vishnu Ande on Mon Sep 27 17:56:28 EDT 2004
    ·  Study not surprising by Rich Scott on Tue Sep 28 20:25:11 EDT 2004
    ·  $$$ by Milan Palian on Wed Oct 27 14:19:34 EDT 2004
    ·  TMC Completes Massive IBM J2EE / .NET Study by Martin Anderson on Wed Nov 03 08:57:34 EST 2004
      ·  TMC Completes Massive IBM J2EE / .NET Study by George Jiang on Fri Nov 05 23:19:20 EST 2004
        ·  TMC Completes Massive IBM J2EE / .NET Study by George Jiang on Fri Nov 05 23:29:54 EST 2004
          ·  300th Post by Dushyanth Inguva on Wed Nov 10 14:43:29 EST 2004
  ·  TMC Completes Massive IBM J2EE / .NET Study by Julien Martin on Tue Sep 21 11:31:13 EDT 2004
    ·  TMC Completes Massive IBM J2EE / .NET Study by Tyler Jewell on Tue Sep 21 11:42:58 EDT 2004
    ·  Biggest bang for the buck by Matt Valentine on Tue Sep 21 12:21:50 EDT 2004
    ·  Study? What study? by Felicity Fendi on Wed Sep 22 15:01:53 EDT 2004
  ·  Woooow by Vic Cekvenich on Tue Sep 21 11:45:59 EDT 2004
    ·  Wooooow - 50-70% code reduction? by Dino Chiesa on Tue Sep 21 11:58:48 EDT 2004
      ·  Wooooow - 50-70% code reduction? by Konstantin Ignatyev on Tue Sep 21 13:03:30 EDT 2004
      ·  Wooooow - 50-70% code reduction? by javier castanon on Tue Sep 21 14:42:12 EDT 2004
  ·  TMC Completes Massive IBM J2EE / .NET Study by Horia Muntean on Tue Sep 21 12:11:12 EDT 2004
    ·  TMC Completes Massive IBM J2EE / .NET Study by Vic Cekvenich on Tue Sep 21 12:18:49 EDT 2004
      ·  TMC Completes Massive IBM J2EE / .NET Study by Mark Nuttall on Tue Sep 21 13:17:07 EDT 2004
        ·  How about maintenance and integration? by arun sahni on Tue Sep 21 13:52:20 EDT 2004
          ·  How about maintenance and integration? by Mark Nuttall on Tue Sep 21 14:03:03 EDT 2004
        ·  TMC Completes Massive IBM J2EE / .NET Study by Srikanth Remani on Tue Sep 21 14:10:09 EDT 2004
    ·  .NET Resources by Daniel Fernandez on Tue Sep 21 13:07:06 EDT 2004
    ·  TMC Completes Massive IBM J2EE / .NET Study by Maris Orbidans on Wed Sep 22 04:35:27 EDT 2004
      ·  TMC Completes Massive IBM J2EE / .NET Study by Horia Muntean on Wed Sep 22 04:50:21 EDT 2004
    ·  Here you can download a .NET stack by Lino Garcia on Wed Sep 22 14:01:35 EDT 2004
      ·  Service Packs from MS by Wojtek Serafin on Wed Sep 22 14:08:10 EDT 2004
        ·  Service Packs from MS by Mark Nuttall on Wed Sep 22 15:20:15 EDT 2004
    ·  Your free .NET stack by Fran?ois Lemaire on Thu Sep 23 05:21:52 EDT 2004
    ·  Price Comparison is a joke by Sal DiStefano on Wed Sep 29 22:01:31 EDT 2004
      ·  your comparison is a joke by Rolf Tollerud on Thu Sep 30 01:42:41 EDT 2004
        ·  your comparison is a joke by Mark Nuttall on Thu Sep 30 08:41:09 EDT 2004
  ·  TMC Completes Massive IBM J2EE / .NET Study by Olivier MARTIN on Tue Sep 21 12:12:20 EDT 2004
    ·  TMC Completes Massive IBM J2EE / .NET Study by Vagif Verdi on Tue Sep 21 12:30:04 EDT 2004
      ·  TMC Completes Massive IBM J2EE / .NET Study by Robert Dean on Tue Sep 21 21:37:18 EDT 2004
  ·  TMC Completes Massive IBM J2EE / .NET Study by Catalin Merfu on Tue Sep 21 12:19:12 EDT 2004
  ·  Sun's JVM attempted? by Ghanshyam Patel on Tue Sep 21 12:22:50 EDT 2004
    ·  Sun's JVM attempted? by Matt Valentine on Tue Sep 21 13:36:17 EDT 2004
    ·  Sun's JVM attempted? by Pallav Jakhotiya on Tue Sep 21 13:46:23 EDT 2004
      ·  Sun's JVM attempted? by Ghanshyam Patel on Tue Sep 21 14:16:26 EDT 2004
        ·  Sun's JVM attempted? by Pallav Jakhotiya on Wed Sep 22 15:45:12 EDT 2004
    ·  Re: Sun's JVM attempted? by Charles Bear on Tue Sep 21 23:38:47 EDT 2004
      ·  Re: Sun's JVM attempted? by Ghanshyam Patel on Wed Sep 22 11:28:00 EDT 2004
        ·  Re: Sun's JVM attempted? by Will Edwards on Wed Sep 22 19:42:36 EDT 2004
  ·  What would be the most productive J2EE environment? by Daniel Haran on Tue Sep 21 12:39:13 EDT 2004
    ·  What would be the most productive J2EE environment? by peter lin on Wed Sep 22 10:14:17 EDT 2004
    ·  What would be the most productive J2EE environment? by Sal DiStefano on Wed Sep 29 21:51:40 EDT 2004
      ·  What would be the most productive J2EE environment? by Mark Nuttall on Thu Sep 30 08:36:56 EDT 2004
  ·  Re: Tyler's Note by Philippe Marcus on Tue Sep 21 12:41:09 EDT 2004
    ·  my previous post by Philippe Marcus on Tue Sep 21 12:42:44 EDT 2004
    ·  IBM not representative? by Sam Ballew on Thu Sep 23 03:32:31 EDT 2004
  ·  ot: sun by Vic Cekvenich on Tue Sep 21 14:13:33 EDT 2004
  ·  MS has had a great impact on Java / J2EE by Rasmus Lund on Tue Sep 21 14:24:28 EDT 2004
    ·  Agreed with you, Ramus by Renat Zubairov on Tue Sep 21 17:30:03 EDT 2004
    ·  MS has had a great impact on Java / J2EE by Jeremy Barkan on Tue Sep 21 17:55:25 EDT 2004
  ·  TMC Completes Massive IBM J2EE / .NET Study by Robert McIntosh on Tue Sep 21 14:33:59 EDT 2004
    ·  TMC Completes Massive IBM J2EE / .NET Study by Mark Nuttall on Tue Sep 21 15:01:18 EDT 2004
    ·  Not a fair comparison? by Dino Chiesa on Tue Sep 21 15:06:21 EDT 2004
    ·  TMC Completes Massive IBM J2EE / .NET Study by F U on Tue Sep 21 15:19:06 EDT 2004
      ·  TMC Completes Massive IBM J2EE / .NET Study by Jason Carreira on Tue Sep 21 21:06:45 EDT 2004
        ·  to be smart - is not to be wrong by Alex V on Tue Sep 21 21:59:07 EDT 2004
          ·  To be Smart - not wrong for business by Michael Geiser on Tue Sep 28 16:52:22 EDT 2004
        ·  TMC Completes Massive IBM J2EE / .NET Study by Robert Dean on Tue Sep 21 22:07:37 EDT 2004
          ·  Continous integration by Edgar Sanchez on Wed Sep 22 00:45:44 EDT 2004
      ·  TMC Completes Massive IBM J2EE / .NET Study by Robert McIntosh on Wed Sep 22 13:09:09 EDT 2004
        ·  TMC Completes Massive IBM J2EE / .NET Study by Juozas Baliuka on Wed Sep 22 13:54:49 EDT 2004
    ·  TMC Completes Massive IBM J2EE / .NET Study by Timur Evdokimov on Thu Sep 23 05:46:03 EDT 2004
      ·  TMC Completes Massive IBM J2EE / .NET Study by Mark Nuttall on Thu Sep 23 07:31:05 EDT 2004
  ·  TMC Completes Massive IBM J2EE / .NET Study by a b on Tue Sep 21 14:34:34 EDT 2004
  ·  I dont need to go to the report to find out who won! by joe jenkins on Tue Sep 21 14:36:46 EDT 2004
    ·  I dont need to go to the report to find out who won! by Tyler Jewell on Tue Sep 21 15:08:48 EDT 2004
      ·  I dont need to go to the report to find out who won! by Juozas Baliuka on Wed Sep 22 12:03:29 EDT 2004
    ·  I dont need to go to the report to find out who won! by Dino Chiesa on Tue Sep 21 15:19:38 EDT 2004
      ·  I dont need to go to the report to find out who won! by Henrique Steckelberg on Tue Sep 21 15:38:39 EDT 2004
        ·  I dont need to go to the report to find out who won! by Tyler Jewell on Tue Sep 21 15:57:09 EDT 2004
          ·  Are sponsors allowed to veto some parts of a study? by Philippe Marcus on Tue Sep 21 17:16:50 EDT 2004
            ·  TSS - your enterprise .nOT .JAVA but .net community... by Philippe Marcus on Tue Sep 21 17:19:34 EDT 2004
        ·  to defend the Websphere is to loose all credibility by Rolf Tollerud on Tue Sep 21 16:02:34 EDT 2004
          ·  Can somebody using Spring/hibernate build a demo? by ping Lu on Tue Sep 21 16:10:41 EDT 2004
            ·  Can somebody using Spring/hibernate build a demo? by Dino Chiesa on Tue Sep 21 16:26:53 EDT 2004
              ·  Spring inside web servlet container by ping Lu on Tue Sep 21 16:30:13 EDT 2004
              ·  Can somebody using Spring/hibernate build a demo? by javier castanon on Tue Sep 21 19:13:40 EDT 2004
                ·  Can somebody using Spring/hibernate build a demo? by Henrique Steckelberg on Tue Sep 21 20:24:11 EDT 2004
                  ·  "it wasn't I that did it and absolutely not deliberately" by Rolf Tollerud on Tue Sep 21 23:42:35 EDT 2004
                    ·  Ebay uses IBM Rolf? by Charles Bear on Wed Sep 22 00:16:54 EDT 2004
                      ·  eBay, in Dantes purgatory.. by Rolf Tollerud on Wed Sep 22 01:50:57 EDT 2004
                      ·  Is eBay really using DLLs? by Roman Kharkovski on Wed Sep 22 10:01:14 EDT 2004
                        ·  Is eBay really using DLLs? by Rolf Tollerud on Wed Sep 22 10:13:51 EDT 2004
                          ·  Is eBay really using DLLs? by Dustin Barlow on Wed Sep 22 12:23:13 EDT 2004
                          ·  Why IBM is shy? by Roman Kharkovski on Wed Sep 22 22:02:34 EDT 2004
                            ·  Rent a report research by B B on Wed Sep 22 22:30:50 EDT 2004
                              ·  Why the IBM Websphere stack by Salil Deshpande on Thu Sep 23 00:28:23 EDT 2004
                                ·  Why the IBM Websphere stack by Juozas Baliuka on Thu Sep 23 03:10:49 EDT 2004
                                ·  Why the IBM Websphere stack by Kalyan Kolachala on Thu Sep 23 06:42:23 EDT 2004
                                  ·  Why the IBM Websphere stack by Tyler Jewell on Thu Sep 23 11:59:34 EDT 2004
                                    ·  Why the IBM Websphere stack by Tyler Jewell on Thu Sep 23 15:52:00 EDT 2004
                                ·  To TMC: WHAT A BIG MISTAKE YOU ARE MAKING!!! by Philippe Marcus on Thu Sep 23 16:28:33 EDT 2004
                                  ·  To TMC: WHAT A BIG MISTAKE YOU ARE MAKING!!! by Philippe Marcus on Thu Sep 23 16:32:02 EDT 2004
                                    ·  Yes, very big mistake by Rolf Tollerud on Thu Sep 23 16:58:33 EDT 2004
                                      ·  Empty vessels make the most noise by Joe A on Thu Sep 23 19:51:41 EDT 2004
                                        ·  Empty vessels make the most noise by Henrique Steckelberg on Thu Sep 23 21:53:28 EDT 2004
                                        ·  EJB == The biggest fiasco in IT history by Rolf Tollerud on Thu Sep 23 22:31:46 EDT 2004
                                          ·  EJB == The biggest fiasco in IT history by B B on Thu Sep 23 23:19:32 EDT 2004
                                            ·  EJB == The biggest fiasco in IT history by Rolf Tollerud on Fri Sep 24 01:24:39 EDT 2004
                                              ·  EJB == The biggest fiasco in IT history by Mark Nuttall on Fri Sep 24 07:51:49 EDT 2004
                                          ·  Low hanging fruit by Joe A on Fri Sep 24 01:30:03 EDT 2004
                                            ·  Low hanging fruit by Rolf Tollerud on Fri Sep 24 08:36:20 EDT 2004
                                              ·  Very low hanging fruit ;-) by Oleg Kalnichevski on Fri Sep 24 09:23:24 EDT 2004
                                                ·  "You seem to have lost your drive somehow" by Rolf Tollerud on Fri Sep 24 10:36:14 EDT 2004
                                                  ·  "You seem to have lost your drive somehow" by peter lin on Fri Sep 24 10:47:29 EDT 2004
                                                  ·  Apparently you did ;-) by Oleg Kalnichevski on Fri Sep 24 11:02:32 EDT 2004
                                                    ·  Apparently you did ;-) by Rolf Tollerud on Fri Sep 24 11:15:44 EDT 2004
                                                      ·  And spinning, spinning, spinning ;-))))) by Oleg Kalnichevski on Fri Sep 24 11:36:03 EDT 2004
                                          ·  EJB == The biggest fiasco in IT history by peter lin on Fri Sep 24 01:59:50 EDT 2004
                                            ·  EJB == The biggest fiasco in IT history by Frank van Moorsel on Fri Sep 24 04:00:08 EDT 2004
                                              ·  IBM results by peter lin on Fri Sep 24 09:57:25 EDT 2004
                                                ·  Top Ten Non-Clustered TPC-C by Performance by Rolf Tollerud on Fri Sep 24 10:53:12 EDT 2004
                                                  ·  P.S. by Rolf Tollerud on Fri Sep 24 11:01:14 EDT 2004
                                                  ·  Top Ten Non-Clustered TPC-C by Performance by peter lin on Fri Sep 24 11:24:34 EDT 2004
                                                    ·  Top Ten Non-Clustered TPC-C by Performance by Rolf Tollerud on Fri Sep 24 11:50:43 EDT 2004
                                                      ·  Tuxedo by peter lin on Fri Sep 24 12:21:29 EDT 2004
                                                        ·  very interesting by Rolf Tollerud on Fri Sep 24 12:30:10 EDT 2004
                                                  ·  Top Ten Non-Clustered TPC-C by Performance by peter lin on Fri Sep 24 11:52:49 EDT 2004
                                                ·  IBM results by frank van Moorsel on Fri Sep 24 15:14:38 EDT 2004
                                                  ·  IBM results, TPC-C, etc by Dino Chiesa on Fri Sep 24 18:36:27 EDT 2004
                                                    ·  IBM results, TPC-C, etc by Dino Chiesa on Fri Sep 24 18:38:05 EDT 2004
                                                    ·  IBM results, TPC-C, etc by peter lin on Fri Sep 24 21:41:55 EDT 2004
                                                    ·  IBM results, TPC-C, etc by peter lin on Fri Sep 24 22:35:12 EDT 2004
                                                      ·  Java Development Productivity Help On The Way by Kevin Duffey on Sat Sep 25 01:59:03 EDT 2004
                                                    ·  correction and clarification by peter lin on Sat Sep 25 10:37:36 EDT 2004
                                                      ·  Zombies from Night of The Living Dead by Rolf Tollerud on Sun Sep 26 13:00:50 EDT 2004
                                                        ·  P.S. by Rolf Tollerud on Sun Sep 26 13:15:57 EDT 2004
                                                        ·  Zombies from Night of The Living Dead by Henrique Steckelberg on Mon Sep 27 08:24:22 EDT 2004
                                                          ·  who’s experience was most worth? by Rolf Tollerud on Mon Sep 27 09:57:02 EDT 2004
                                                            ·  who’s experience was most worth? by Henrique Steckelberg on Mon Sep 27 10:42:39 EDT 2004
                                                              ·  you can not try everything by Rolf Tollerud on Mon Sep 27 11:55:13 EDT 2004
                                                                ·  you can not try everything by Mark Nuttall on Mon Sep 27 21:24:32 EDT 2004
                                                                  ·  last nail in the coffin for Websphere by Rolf Tollerud on Wed Sep 29 02:10:33 EDT 2004
                                                                    ·  last nail in the coffin for Websphere by Mark Nuttall on Wed Sep 29 08:01:37 EDT 2004
                                                                      ·  am I the victim of a cruel joke? by Rolf Tollerud on Wed Sep 29 08:31:57 EDT 2004
                                                                        ·  am I the victim of a cruel joke? by Mark Nuttall on Wed Sep 29 09:15:14 EDT 2004
                                                                ·  Irony by peter lin on Mon Sep 27 22:19:12 EDT 2004
                                                                  ·  Webservices works fine for me by Rolf Tollerud on Tue Sep 28 06:15:09 EDT 2004
                                                                    ·  Webservices works fine for me by Mark Nuttall on Tue Sep 28 08:30:47 EDT 2004
                                                                    ·  Webservices works fine for me by peter lin on Tue Sep 28 08:59:59 EDT 2004
                                                                      ·  Webservices works fine for me by Rolf Tollerud on Tue Sep 28 11:47:21 EDT 2004
                                                                        ·  Webservices works fine for me by peter lin on Tue Sep 28 12:01:53 EDT 2004
                                                                          ·  Webservices works fine for me by Rolf Tollerud on Tue Sep 28 12:52:51 EDT 2004
                                                                            ·  P.S. by Rolf Tollerud on Tue Sep 28 13:00:12 EDT 2004
                                                                              ·  P.S. by peter lin on Tue Sep 28 13:38:33 EDT 2004
                                                                                ·  Hmm by Rolf Tollerud on Tue Sep 28 13:45:55 EDT 2004
                                                                                ·  after having though about it.. by Rolf Tollerud on Tue Sep 28 22:26:30 EDT 2004
                                                                                  ·  P.S. by Rolf Tollerud on Tue Sep 28 22:48:40 EDT 2004
                                                                                    ·  More WebSphere bashing from the same person by George Jiang on Wed Sep 29 11:24:32 EDT 2004
                                                                                  ·  after having though about it.. by peter lin on Wed Sep 29 09:12:26 EDT 2004
                                                                                    ·  after having though about it.. by Mark Nuttall on Wed Sep 29 09:29:55 EDT 2004
                                                                                      ·  after having though about it.. by peter lin on Wed Sep 29 11:06:00 EDT 2004
                                                                                        ·  after having though about it.. by Mark Nuttall on Wed Sep 29 11:10:16 EDT 2004
                                                                                          ·  after having though about it.. by peter lin on Wed Sep 29 11:22:13 EDT 2004
                                                                                            ·  after having though about it.. by Mark Nuttall on Wed Sep 29 12:27:58 EDT 2004
                                                                                  ·  after having though about it.. by Mark Nuttall on Wed Sep 29 09:23:39 EDT 2004
                                                                                    ·  Awesome by Rolf Tollerud on Wed Sep 29 09:32:37 EDT 2004
                                                                                      ·  Awesome by Mark Nuttall on Wed Sep 29 09:59:14 EDT 2004
                                                                                        ·  Hmm by Rolf Tollerud on Wed Sep 29 11:17:26 EDT 2004
                                                                                          ·  Hmm by Mark Nuttall on Wed Sep 29 12:24:19 EDT 2004
                                                                                  ·  after having though about it.. (GigaSpaces) by Gad Barnea on Thu Sep 30 20:27:23 EDT 2004
                                                                                    ·  after having though about it.. (GigaSpaces) by Mark Nuttall on Fri Oct 01 07:36:08 EDT 2004
                                                                                      ·  after having though about it.. (GigaSpaces) by Gad Barnea on Wed Oct 06 00:58:03 EDT 2004
                                                                                    ·  T+1 and financial protocols by peter lin on Sat Oct 02 01:25:36 EDT 2004
                                                                                      ·  T+1 and financial protocols by Gad Barnea on Wed Oct 06 00:43:57 EDT 2004
                                                                                        ·  T+1 and financial protocols by Mark Nuttall on Wed Oct 06 07:40:36 EDT 2004
                                                  ·  IBM results by peter lin on Fri Sep 24 21:53:50 EDT 2004
                                            ·  EJB == The biggest fiasco in IT history by Star Trooper on Fri Sep 24 04:21:16 EDT 2004
                                            ·  lies, damn lies, and Anecdotes by Dino Chiesa on Fri Sep 24 19:25:49 EDT 2004
                                              ·  one last thing by Dino Chiesa on Fri Sep 24 19:29:05 EDT 2004
                                              ·  re: Dino's post - lies, damn lies, etc by Kevin Duffey on Sat Sep 25 02:26:44 EDT 2004
                                                ·  Java server with encryption for online credit card payments by Willie Dee on Sun Oct 05 08:31:39 EDT 2008
                                              ·  Research Data by B B on Sat Sep 25 06:02:38 EDT 2004
                                          ·  EJB == The biggest fiasco in IT history by Henrique Steckelberg on Fri Sep 24 07:47:11 EDT 2004
            ·  not dreamed up by well-meaning impractical theoreticians by Rolf Tollerud on Tue Sep 21 16:28:32 EDT 2004
              ·  Spring team need do this demo, make a case to those big guys by ping Lu on Tue Sep 21 16:34:59 EDT 2004
              ·  not dreamed up by well-meaning impractical theoreticians by Ghanshyam Patel on Tue Sep 21 17:36:56 EDT 2004
            ·  Spring/Hibernate with J2EE app server by Anjan Bacchu on Tue Sep 21 16:31:56 EDT 2004
      ·  I dont need to go to the report to find out who won! by joe jenkins on Thu Sep 23 03:50:14 EDT 2004
        ·  please, the TSS members are not naive by Rolf Tollerud on Thu Sep 23 05:24:46 EDT 2004
  ·  TMC Completes Massive IBM J2EE / .NET Study by Juozas Baliuka on Tue Sep 21 14:58:29 EDT 2004
  ·  One(1) voice againd 1000's by Rolf Tollerud on Tue Sep 21 15:07:52 EDT 2004
  ·  WebSphere wrong flag bearer by Jason Carreira on Tue Sep 21 18:16:43 EDT 2004
    ·  WebSphere wrong flag bearer by Nick Minutello on Tue Sep 21 20:12:23 EDT 2004
      ·  WebSphere wrong flag bearer by Steve Wilkes on Tue Sep 21 21:44:59 EDT 2004
      ·  WebSphere wrong flag bearer by Roger Lee on Wed Sep 22 04:57:17 EDT 2004
      ·  WebSphere wrong flag bearer by Robert Dean on Wed Sep 22 06:10:07 EDT 2004
        ·  WebSphere wrong flag bearer by Nick Minutello on Wed Sep 22 07:12:07 EDT 2004
          ·  WebSphere wrong flag bearer by Jonathan Whitall on Wed Oct 20 16:55:54 EDT 2004
  ·  come on Richard.. by Rolf Tollerud on Tue Sep 21 18:56:10 EDT 2004
  ·  Would you have coded the J2EE app the way they did it? by Philippe Grenet on Tue Sep 21 22:21:01 EDT 2004
    ·  Would you have coded the J2EE app the way they did it? by Steve Wilkes on Tue Sep 21 22:43:37 EDT 2004
  ·  M$ paid FUD : about Linux and Java by Jamie Schiner on Tue Sep 21 22:49:36 EDT 2004
    ·  M$ paid FUD : about Linux and Java by Mark Nuttall on Wed Sep 22 07:27:55 EDT 2004
    ·  Any guess, any theory? by Rolf Tollerud on Wed Sep 22 08:31:40 EDT 2004
      ·  P.S. by Rolf Tollerud on Wed Sep 22 08:42:18 EDT 2004
        ·  M$ fud spread ..... by Jamie Schiner on Wed Sep 22 09:39:40 EDT 2004
      ·  Any guess, any theory? by peter lin on Wed Sep 22 10:26:10 EDT 2004
        ·  Any guess, any theory? by pratheep p on Wed Sep 22 10:50:30 EDT 2004
          ·  Any guess, any theory? by peter lin on Wed Sep 22 10:58:15 EDT 2004
        ·  "I was laughing so hard" by Rolf Tollerud on Wed Sep 22 10:51:14 EDT 2004
          ·  "I was laughing so hard" by peter lin on Wed Sep 22 11:03:29 EDT 2004
            ·  like Diogenes "Quaero hominem" by Rolf Tollerud on Wed Sep 22 11:24:47 EDT 2004
              ·  like Diogenes "Quaero hominem" by Juozas Baliuka on Wed Sep 22 12:41:51 EDT 2004
              ·  like Diogenes "Quaero hominem" by peter lin on Wed Sep 22 14:06:49 EDT 2004
                ·  good old capitalism in practice by Rolf Tollerud on Wed Sep 22 15:57:48 EDT 2004
                  ·  good old capitalism in practice by peter lin on Wed Sep 22 16:08:42 EDT 2004
                    ·  out with the old, in with the new by Rolf Tollerud on Wed Sep 22 16:43:29 EDT 2004
                      ·  out with the old, in with the new by peter lin on Wed Sep 22 17:11:44 EDT 2004
                        ·  the Customer is always right by Rolf Tollerud on Wed Sep 22 18:53:13 EDT 2004
                          ·  the Customer is always right by peter lin on Wed Sep 22 19:18:23 EDT 2004
  ·  M$ Just does not 'get it' does it? by Michael McCutcheon on Tue Sep 21 23:59:17 EDT 2004
    ·  You do not get it... by Michael Geiser on Tue Sep 28 16:57:30 EDT 2004
  ·  Learn from this one! by Charles Bear on Wed Sep 22 00:10:48 EDT 2004
    ·  Learn from this one! by Rob Harrop on Wed Sep 22 03:59:20 EDT 2004
      ·  Learn from this one! by Juozas Baliuka on Wed Sep 22 04:38:44 EDT 2004
      ·  Learn from this one! by Dino Chiesa on Wed Sep 22 15:48:49 EDT 2004
  ·  TMC Completes Massive IBM J2EE / .NET Study by Juozas Baliuka on Wed Sep 22 03:47:37 EDT 2004
  ·  No version management?? by Matthias Fraass on Wed Sep 22 04:05:17 EDT 2004
    ·  No version management?? by Juozas Baliuka on Wed Sep 22 04:17:07 EDT 2004
    ·  No version management?? by Mark Nuttall on Wed Sep 22 07:47:08 EDT 2004
      ·  Version Control Clarification by Steve Wilkes on Wed Sep 22 12:25:33 EDT 2004
    ·  No version management?? by George Jiang on Wed Sep 22 18:54:07 EDT 2004
      ·  No version management?? by Steve Wilkes on Wed Sep 22 19:05:15 EDT 2004
        ·  WSAD/WebSphere bashing by George Jiang on Wed Sep 22 22:08:56 EDT 2004
  ·  Another week, another lame study by M A on Wed Sep 22 05:04:27 EDT 2004
    ·  Another week, another lame study by Juozas Baliuka on Wed Sep 22 05:15:09 EDT 2004
  ·  And today's other news.... by jonathan rowe on Wed Sep 22 05:38:17 EDT 2004
    ·  TSS is maturing by Rolf Tollerud on Wed Sep 22 06:20:23 EDT 2004
  ·  Selling the same stuff multiple times ... by Pre W. on Wed Sep 22 10:14:24 EDT 2004
    ·  About eBay by Mikheil Sukhiashvili on Wed Sep 22 11:03:05 EDT 2004
      ·  About eBay by Robert McIntosh on Wed Sep 22 12:48:46 EDT 2004
    ·  TSS and its role: a history? by Philippe Marcus on Wed Sep 22 12:32:55 EDT 2004
      ·  TSS and its role: a history? by Philippe Marcus on Wed Sep 22 12:37:19 EDT 2004
  ·  decision makers - This is a single data point by Dan Barber on Wed Sep 22 10:36:05 EDT 2004
  ·  Why then .NET enterprise apps keep migrating to J2EE by Pawan Kumar on Wed Sep 22 11:23:09 EDT 2004
  ·  TMC Completes Massive IBM J2EE / .NET Study by jelmer kuperus on Wed Sep 22 11:24:19 EDT 2004
  ·  Why all the bashing??? by Dushyanth Inguva on Wed Sep 22 16:01:22 EDT 2004
  ·  Summary of the research results by Kalyan Kolachala on Thu Sep 23 07:25:39 EDT 2004
    ·  the whining and squirming goes on.. by Rolf Tollerud on Thu Sep 23 08:15:49 EDT 2004
      ·  the whining and squirming goes on.. by George Jiang on Thu Sep 23 09:49:31 EDT 2004
        ·  presstop, redo all tests.. by Rolf Tollerud on Thu Sep 23 10:31:40 EDT 2004
      ·  the whining and squirming goes on.. by Mark Nuttall on Thu Sep 23 10:51:23 EDT 2004
  ·  Some .NET cheats got through! by John Davies on Fri Sep 24 17:58:51 EDT 2004
    ·  Some .NET cheats got through! - NOT by Dino Chiesa on Fri Sep 24 21:06:50 EDT 2004
      ·  Some .NET cheats got through! - NOT by John Davies on Sat Sep 25 09:47:54 EDT 2004
  ·  ETrade Beats the Clock with Java and Open Source by Jamie Schiner on Tue Sep 28 23:04:34 EDT 2004
    ·  Only Tomcat and Linux, out with Sun Solaris :) by Rolf Tollerud on Wed Sep 29 01:58:05 EDT 2004
      ·  Only Tomcat and Linux, out with Sun Solaris :) by peter lin on Wed Sep 29 09:48:14 EDT 2004
  ·  TMC didn't learn from its own MISTAKES!!!!! by Scott Chambers on Thu Oct 07 10:52:09 EDT 2004
  ·  Breaking News: Internal IBM Report Says "Another Flawed Study" by Mike Edwards on Tue Oct 26 11:05:37 EDT 2004
    ·  really have to wonder why TMC didn't use Hibernate by Ken Yee on Tue Oct 26 17:55:55 EDT 2004
  Message #138833 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

TMC Completes Massive IBM J2EE / .NET Study

Posted by: Paul Rivers on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138558
Well, again "Microsoft commissioned The Middleware Co. Inc. to study productivity and performance comparisons between Microsoft's Visual Studio .Net 2003 and IBM's WebSphere and other tools".

Amazingly, next month when IBM commissions an "independent study", it finds that Websphere is faster!

I dunno, it's just really really hard for me to believe that it really took twice as long with java, or that it an article that goes on and on and on about how wonderful Microsoft is really has to do with an impartial study.

  Message #138838 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

TMC Completes Massive IBM J2EE / .NET Study

Posted by: Julien Martin on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138558
Why not have chosen an open-source app server such as jboss in order to carry out this study? Java is closely tied to open source software. The results in terms of price would have been very different.
Julien.

  Message #138839 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

TMC Completes Massive IBM J2EE / .NET Study

Posted by: Julien Dubois on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138833
I completly agree with you, Paul.
OTOH, they say that Websphere/WSAD is a slow, unproductive and painful environnement. We can't really blame TSS, the whole community already knew that for a fact.
Next time they should test .NET against a real, productive J2EE environnement.

  Message #138841 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

TMC Completes Massive IBM J2EE / .NET Study

Posted by: Tyler Jewell on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138833
Well, again "Microsoft commissioned The Middleware Co. Inc. to study productivity and performance comparisons between Microsoft's Visual Studio .Net 2003 and IBM's WebSphere and other tools".I dunno, it's just really really hard for me to believe that it really took twice as long with java, or that it an article that goes on and on and on about how wonderful Microsoft is really has to do with an impartial study.
Hi Paul. Thanks for the early comments. I can appreciate your skepticism on any comparisons between IBM and Microsoft. However, I encourage you to read through the report, the auditor's report, and the associated notes. There is a good reconstruction of what happened where. In fact, in many situations, third parties were brought in to optimize tuning of Linux and WebSphere -- my point being that the extensiveness of this study and the efforts taken by multiple groups in the analysis and tuning of systems was significant.

And, since the technologies (note that this is an IBM vs. .NET study, not J2EE vs. .NET) are compared on multiple dimensions, each dimension should be compared individually to grok the entire picture. I found it to be an educational (and long) read.

Tyler
The Middleware Company (a witness to the study, but not directly involved)

  Message #138842 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

TMC Completes Massive IBM J2EE / .NET Study

Posted by: Tyler Jewell on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138838
Why not have chosen an open-source app server such as jboss in order to carry out this study? Java is closely tied to open source software. The results in terms of price would have been very different.Julien.
This research endeavor was designed to be an IBM vs. .NET analysis as opposed to a J2EE vs. .NET comparison. The research was configured to compare an enterprise application in development, test, deployment and maintenance mode -- deployed in likely production environments for preferred Microsoft and IBM architectures. In the case of IBM, there were two complete stacks created: one on Rational Rapid Developer and another with WSAD / WebSphere deployed on Linux.

Since the focus was on likely large customer deployment scenarios, choosing IBM (not J2EE) as a focus area was an early decision made -- so other J2EE application servers wasn't considered for this effort.

  Message #138843 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

Woooow

Posted by: Vic Cekvenich on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138558
A very impresive study. It could be titled "everything we know about sofware so far".


Some coments:
- to be fair, LAMP (aka PHP) should have been included.
(which leads to... tomcat, ibatis, pgSQL, Eclipse stack possibiliity as well.

Scary:
"Somasegar said Microsoft will be delivering changes to its development technology that will enable developers to create applications with 50 percent to 70 percent less code required." I assume he is talking about XAML (watch out JDNC!)

OT:
But ... afaik, most banks and large companies ban MS Servers due to security and cost of operation. Illustration:
http://media.trendmicro.com/product/nvw/index.html

.V

ms vs Open/Source "get the fud":
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1618813,00.asp

  Message #138847 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

TMC Completes Massive IBM J2EE / .NET Study

Posted by: Tero Vaananen on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138841
And, since the technologies (note that this is an IBM vs. .NET study, not J2EE vs. .NET) are compared on multiple dimensions, each dimension should be compared individually to grok the entire picture.
This is not a J2EE vs. .NET study, but that is exactly how it is going to play out. All you need to say is that Websphere is a standard J2EE application server, and there it is. Next time you hear how crappy J2EE is, they are pointing at this study.

  Message #138848 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

This is another setup job from you guys

Posted by: Paul O'Connor on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138841
(note that this is an IBM vs. .NET study, not J2EE vs. .NET)
Download page:

"The Middleware Company research report of the study: Comparing Microsoft .NET and IBM WebSphere/J2EE: A Productivity, Performance, Reliability and Manageability Analysis."

Why can't we get a fair shake from you guys? Eweek trumpets this as J2EE versus .NET thanks to this. Whatever happened to truth in advertising?

  Message #138849 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

Keep in mind what the sponsor wanted...

Posted by: Robert Dean on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138839
TMC didn't have a choice of products to test. Microsoft is only concerned about getting competitive leverage over IBM/Linux/WebSphere, so that is the study they sponsored.

  Message #138851 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

Wooooow - 50-70% code reduction?

Posted by: Dino Chiesa on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138843
Scary:"Somasegar said Microsoft will be delivering changes to its development technology that will enable developers to create applications with 50 percent to 70 percent less code required." I assume he is talking about XAML (watch out JDNC!)
Nope, I think Soma was talking about server-side programming, where XAML is mostly client-side UI. There are some nice advances in ASP.NET that make common scenarios simpler and easier.

  Message #138853 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

Keep in mind what the sponsor wanted...

Posted by: Robert Dean on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138849
OTOH, the WebSphere teams chose Oracle 9i for the database and not DB2. I've always had better luck using WebSphere with DB2 rather than Oracle.

  Message #138854 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

Well it pays for the website :-)

Posted by: Neil Ellis on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138839
+1

It's like those annoying adverts that appear in the middle of online articles. Just like when you're reading an article on Linux you get a Microsoft advert half-way through. It pays for the website. And so we put up with this nonsense in the meantime. Nonsense : here defined as _any_ report commisioned by an IT vendor.

  Message #138855 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

TMC Completes Massive IBM J2EE / .NET Study

Posted by: Dino Chiesa on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138847
This is not a J2EE vs. .NET study, but that is exactly how it is going to play out. All you need to say is that Websphere is a standard J2EE application server, and there it is. Next time you hear how crappy J2EE is, they are pointing at this study.
You're exactly right. And this is not a new phenomenon - it has been happening for a long time, hasn't it? Understandably, the J2EE vendors are happy when it is good news (and they all share credit) but unhappy when it is bad news (and they all get the blame). The origin of the confision was the original positioning of J2EE from Sun: "the one platform you need, available from multiple vendors" (my paraphrase of course, but I think it is accurate). I guess the differences in implementations that you refer to, show that J2EE really isn't the same across all vendors. Hmmm, not vendor neutral eh? Interesting. . .

  Message #138856 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

MS Marketing Machine

Posted by: boni Kabs on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138833
I think this is where MS are really good at-Marketing. The whole process here might be fraught with all sorts of flaws, but when a decission marker in some of these companies see this, they will be happy to buy into it this .NET thing. I think the J2EE camp isn't doing enough to sell J2EE. What happened to Sun's Java marketing campaign. BTW MS is flooding African Universities with all manner of .NET free products and they have even made the .NET conference an annual event for african universities..and where is the J2EE camp ...??? The answer is I don't know.

  Message #138858 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

TMC Completes Massive IBM J2EE / .NET Study

Posted by: Horia Muntean on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138558
Quoting from EWeek article
<quote>
The comparison not only involved productivity and performance, but also cost. According to the study, the Microsoft results are based on a system running Visual Studio .Net running on Windows Server 2003 and costing $19,294. The IBM results are based on a system running WebSphere Network Deployment edition running on Red Hat Linux and costing $253,996.
</quote>

Damn thing! This is overwhelming! We better surrender and move on to meet the future: .NET

Regards,
Horia

P.S. From where can I download a free (for personal use) .NET stack (SQL Server, IIS, Visual Studio .NET, docs) so I can start learning?

  Message #138859 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

TMC Completes Massive IBM J2EE / .NET Study

Posted by: Olivier MARTIN on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138558
TSS is a great J2EE news portal, but i give no credibility anymore with its studies.

  Message #138860 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

Keep in mind what the sponsor wanted...

Posted by: Tero Vaananen on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138849
TMC didn't have a choice of products to test. Microsoft is only concerned about getting competitive leverage over IBM/Linux/WebSphere, so that is the study they sponsored.
Of course not. Microsoft had already tested everything before comissioning the work to TMC to be sure of the result, hence Websphere (its cumbersome and clumsy nature is pretty much common knowledge). It does not really matter that the comparison is between .NET and Websphere, because they will use it as .NET vs. J2EE and you are seeing this happening already.

  Message #138861 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

TMC Completes Massive IBM J2EE / .NET Study

Posted by: Vic Cekvenich on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138858
From where can I download a free .NET stack (SQL Server, IIS, Visual Studio .NET, docs) so I can start learning?
You can get free C# express here:

http://lab.msdn.microsoft.com/express/vcsharp/default.aspx

(it works with pgSQL since pgSQL supports Windows connectivity)

I am not sure how to port it to Mac? Mono?!

.V

ps: This is a balanced report IMO. Just becuase it disagrees w/ your religion, does not make it wrong. There are good things in C#, and for developers, choices are a good thing.
Linux/Open source will allways be used for heavy lifting, and .NET will be used for deparmental solutions.

  Message #138862 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

TMC Completes Massive IBM J2EE / .NET Study

Posted by: Catalin Merfu on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138558
I expected .NET is better than WebSphere as it's one of the worst J2EE implementations.

My projects are at least 2x more performant than J2EE so better than .NET. This test is a very good hint I should not switch to MSFT.

  Message #138864 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

Biggest bang for the buck

Posted by: Matt Valentine on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138838
Why not have chosen an open-source app server such as jboss in order to carry out this study? Java is closely tied to open source software. The results in terms of price would have been very different.Julien.
MS is moving into the Enterprise space--IBM's space. That's why they went after WebSphere.

  Message #138865 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

Sun's JVM attempted?

Posted by: Ghanshyam Patel on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138558
On Page 59 of 109:
"Sun’s JVM uses the parameter -XX:+UseConcMarkSweepGC to turn on concurrent GC.
However, when the team tried it, they got an error indicating that the JVM could not start. The reason was that WebSphere 5.1 is installed with IBM’s JVM 1.4.1, which does not recognize this parameter.The team briefly tried having WebSphere use Sun’s JVM instead, but quickly ran into other errors."

Huh? If you've worked with WebSphere for a while, you will know that WebSphere runs only on IBM JDKs. Besides, this is explicitly made clear in the software prerequisites for WebSphere.

Why would you even attempt to try running it on Sun's JVM?

  Message #138867 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

TMC Completes Massive IBM J2EE / .NET Study

Posted by: Vagif Verdi on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138859
Oliver Martin:
TSS is a great J2EE news portal, but i give no credibility anymore with its studies.
Why ? Because you do not like results of study ? :))
I'm involved now in a project using ASP.NET, and I must say, I enjoy environment (VS), language (C#), framework (ASP.NET) and loads of exelent third-party components and tools (Resharper, Intragistic, Deklarit...)
Besides open source movenent getting momentum in dotnet (NUnit, Nant, NHibernate, NSpring)

Aren't you guys pro-choice ? I'm happy that I have a choice between 2 exelent platforms - java and dotnet.
And I think such studies ave very useful for both worlds. Because it is a healthy competition. It is what drives Sun and MS to get better.

  Message #138870 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

What would be the most productive J2EE environment?

Posted by: Daniel Haran on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138558
Having done limited work with MS tools, I understand that sometimes, especially for easy projects, it can be faster. Many of my colleagues find Java cumbersome, and I sometimes curse at how I could be doing a task much faster in many other programming languages. It's discouraging to study web services under J2EE, only to be sneered at by other coders that claim it's easy as pie in .Net.

Bottom line, I'm worried that Fortune 500 companies are switching to .Net, and concerned that programmer productivity does not seem to be a big deal for J2EE tool vendors. What should I be doing to be more productive with Java? What tools, frameworks, etc, would you stack up against .Net if you could fund your own study? And are there any groups that are on our side, trying to make Java a better tool for coders?

  Message #138871 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

Re: Tyler's Note

Posted by: Philippe Marcus on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138558
This research endeavor was designed to be an IBM vs. .NET analysis as opposed to a J2EE vs. .NET comparison. ..... Since the focus was on likely large customer deployment scenarios, choosing IBM (not J2EE) as a focus area was an early decision made -- so other J2EE application servers wasn't considered for this effort.
Well if it was designed to be an IBM vs .net why lead this news post with IBM J2EE vs .NET? I really think the idea here was to get attention to J2EE vs .NET else you wouldn't have led the news post the way it is now.

Also, this leads to start thinking...TSS is increasingly becoming a microsoft shop.. Or is TSS trying to handwave and act a good citizen to both J2EE and .NET to earn a few extra $$$

Anyway many of these results don't compare apples to apples...they are far from reality and choosing IBM J2EE against .NET is not fair to the J2EE world. Is TSS a .net community or java? If so, we should be running tests that are fair to both sides... IBM is not representative of the J2EE world. If it was a paid initiative possibly the results of it should be posted here because it doesn't balance both sides of the coin. It was done out of mutual interest for TSS and microsoft to make $$$...

  Message #138873 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

my previous post

Posted by: Philippe Marcus on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138871
I meant NOT...missed the word in this para
If it was a paid initiative possibly the results of it should be posted here because it doesn't balance both sides of the coin. It was done out of mutual interest for TSS and microsoft to make $$$...
If it was a paid initiative possibly the results of it should NOT be posted here because it doesn't balance both sides of the coin. It was done out of mutual interest for TSS and microsoft to make $$$...

  Message #138879 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

Wooooow - 50-70% code reduction?

Posted by: Konstantin Ignatyev on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138851
Scary:"Somasegar said Microsoft will be delivering changes to its development technology that will enable developers to create applications with 50 percent to 70 percent less code required." I assume he is talking about XAML (watch out JDNC!)
Nope, I think Soma was talking about server-side programming, where XAML is mostly client-side UI. There are some nice advances in ASP.NET that make common scenarios simpler and easier.
Our projects consist from:
- MTLOC - Manually typed LOC; - that is what developers actually type in redactors and IDEs.
- GLOC - Generated LOC; that is some kind of“plumbing” code that various code generators and helpers create to support certain technologies: CORBA, WS, EJB, persistence, etc.
- ULOC - Used LOC; - number of code lines in all used libraries. I would differentiate among them

o Trusted code: TULOC ? stuff like JDK or OS, some widely used and well known libraries (Oracle JDBC for instance)
o Risky code: RULOC ? some stuff from a small vendor, first time used framework etc.
Note: What is TULOC and what is RULOC is a completely personal/team decision which might not have apparent reasons.
I assume good code quality and smart developers here, that means some direct correlations between LOC, project complexity and man-months.
There is a question:
- Which project is more complex: one that uses 1000 MTLOC or another that has 100 MTCLOC and 10000 RULOC?
Full text at http://kgionline.com/articles/mtloc/mtloc.jsp

So, where is the reduction and what is the price?

  Message #138880 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

.NET Resources

Posted by: Daniel Fernandez on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138858
>>P.S. From where can I download a free (for personal use) .NET stack (SQL >>Server, IIS, Visual Studio .NET, docs) so I can start learning?

There are a number of free options available for .NET development, I've listed some below, but you'll find many more on the web.

Database
.NET doesn't require you to use a specific database provider so you are not required to use SQL Server for .NET applications and you can use MySQL, Access or whatever database you prefer for your .NET application.

You can download SQL Server 2000 SP3 (MSDE) for free at: http://www.microsoft.com/sql/downloads/2000/sp3.asp

Web Server
IIS is available with Windows XP Professional or above. Another option would be to use Cassini - http://www.asp.net/Projects/Cassini/Download/Default.aspx?tabindex=0&tabid=1. There are also several companies that offer free web hosting for ASP.NET applictions like Brinkster - www.brinkster.com.

Tool
While Visual Studio .NET 2003 is not available for free (other then a 60 day trial), there are a number of free tools you can use for .NET development.

C# Builder Personal Edition - http://www.borland.com/products/downloads/download_csharpbuilder.html

#Develop - http://www.sharpdevelop.com/OpenSource/SD/Default.aspx

C# add-in for Eclipse - http://www.improve-technologies.com/alpha/esharp/

C# for emacs - http://www.cybercom.net/~zbrad/DotNet/Emacs/

You can also test drive the next release of Visual Studio by using Express which is designed for developers learning the .NET Framework - http://lab.msdn.microsoft.com/express/

Documentation
You can find the full, free documentation at: http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/
Or use the .NET Quickstarts to get you started - http://samples.gotdotnet.com/quickstart/

  Message #138881 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

TMC Completes Massive IBM J2EE / .NET Study

Posted by: Mark Nuttall on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138861
Linux/Open source will allways be used for heavy lifting, and .NET will be used for deparmental solutions.
Why? Why can't Linux/Open Source be used for that too? In fact, it is better suited.

  Message #138886 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

Sun's JVM attempted?

Posted by: Matt Valentine on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138865
On Page 59 of 109:"Sun’s JVM uses the parameter -XX:+UseConcMarkSweepGC to turn on concurrent GC.However, when the team tried it, they got an error indicating that the JVM could not start. The reason was that WebSphere 5.1 is installed with IBM’s JVM 1.4.1, which does not recognize this parameter.The team briefly tried having WebSphere use Sun’s JVM instead, but quickly ran into other errors."Huh? If you've worked with WebSphere for a while, you will know that WebSphere runs only on IBM JDKs. Besides, this is explicitly made clear in the software prerequisites for WebSphere. Why would you even attempt to try running it on Sun's JVM?
There are a couple of points here: WebSphere only runs on IBM's JVM--so much for 'choice'. Secondly, even seasoned WebSphere/J2EE staff end up chasing red-herrings as a result of all of WebSphere's 'moving parts' (OS/JVM/WebSphere/J2EE/apps), all adding to the overall cost. Why they didn't know that WebSphere only runs on IBM's JVM is of concern.

  Message #138887 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

TMC Completes Massive IBM J2EE / .NET Study

Posted by: Srinivas Dorairaj on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138833
I've had experience working with VB/Visual Studio 6 and Java/J2EE. Microsofts strength has always been its tools like VS and VS.NET that make development of common coding constructs and scenarios simple for the lay programmer. Having worked on several large projects, I can see why a manager in a large company may choose to develop using Microsoft technologies, considering that it is much easier to do. While J2EE app servers try to achieve robustness, MS tries to concentrate on how business decisions for choice of platform are made and tries to make that choice easier, by reducing the upfront cost. You may actually land up paying more trying to maintain an application built using MS stuff, but it is likely you will get it out to market earlier than a competitor using J2EE. The lesson for J2EE really is 'simplify' and provide good tools to make development of some of the more complex pieces simple. What I would really be interested in seeing is a coherent opensource J2EE toolset including a J2EE server, full fledged IDE with a lot of templates to ease development and documentation all bundled together as cohesively at the .NET stuff. You can't go after this stuff in the piecemeal manner we have been going after in the J2EE world. Bottomline, managers are looking for a whole suite of tools not just pieces, at a low upfront cost, with enough trained developers on that suite available at a reasonable price and good support once deployed. This really is the challenge.

  Message #138888 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

Sun's JVM attempted?

Posted by: Pallav Jakhotiya on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138865
>Huh? If you've worked with WebSphere for a while, you will know that WebSphere >runs only on IBM JDKs. Besides, this is explicitly made clear in the software >prerequisites for WebSphere.
>Why would you even attempt to try running it on Sun's JVM?

This is a myth. Websphere on Solaris uses the Sun's JVM.

-Pallav

  Message #138889 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

How about maintenance and integration?

Posted by: arun sahni on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138881
We have many more factors in life cycle of product. Is this study covers?
-Maintenance efforts
-Integration with other systems
-Deployment to production
-Testing etc.

I think we include more criteria’s to study two technologies otherwise it will be one company’s marketing efforts over other.

  Message #138890 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

How about maintenance and integration?

Posted by: Mark Nuttall on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138889
We have many more factors in life cycle of product. Is this study covers? -Maintenance efforts-Integration with other systems-Deployment to production -Testing etc.I think we include more criteria’s to study two technologies otherwise it will be one company’s marketing efforts over other.
I saw failover. How about clustering? caching? Adding a new server to the cluster/failover/cache?

  Message #138892 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

TMC Completes Massive IBM J2EE / .NET Study

Posted by: Srikanth Remani on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138881
IBM Websphere is the most aggressively marketed Application Server in J2EE, so I see a good reason why MSFT went after IBM with respect to the study.
As far as using the report for J2EE vs. .Net discussion, yes it would make it to those arguments as long as IBM is the well-respected App Server Java vendor with over one-third of j22ee market. So I conclude most of you agree that atleast 40% of J2EE world (and most of it in the High-end corp environment)is using a framework or environment that is inferior to .Net framework.

  Message #138894 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

ot: sun

Posted by: Vic Cekvenich on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138558
IBM has most J2EE market share as per netcraft!

But:
http://news.com.com/Sun+Weve+turned+over+a+new+leaf/2100-1010_3-5375931.html?tag=nl

Wow, if I can get AMD + Linux + Java:
http://www.sun.com/desktop/sysadmin.html
.V

ps: Yes, I am MS, it's easy to pass the silly tests.

  Message #138896 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

Sun's JVM attempted?

Posted by: Ghanshyam Patel on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138888
This particular project was on Red Hat Linux. The software pre-requisites at http://www-306.ibm.com/software/webservers/appserv/doc/v51/prereqs/was_v51.htm requires an IBM JDK on Linux on Intel.

My point is that if you've spent time configuring/tuning WebSphere, you will pretty much find that most of the JVM perf. tuning literature available is for Sun's JVM and hence, is of no use in tuning WebSphere. (other than conceptual knowledge gained).

This is like following a Honda manual on a Nissan car. The fact that the experts on this project took this step, rather nonchalantly it seems, is odd.

  Message #138900 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

MS has had a great impact on Java / J2EE

Posted by: Rasmus Lund on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138558
OK - so this study comparing .NET and WS might not reflect the truth. On the other hand, dot-net and c-sharp with all the hype and marketing has really helped to improve Java and J2EE - let me explain:

With Java 5 we get a lot of new great features - most of them with massive inspiration from C#, which in turn "stole" a lot of ideas from Java.

And why did IBM open source Eclipse? Remember the study 2 or 3 years ago, that compared .NET and J2EE, and found that Java/J2EE really needed a single IDE, that everybody would just write plugins for (as is the case with MS VS)???

And why do we get a MASSIVE simplifacation of EJB in v. 3.0?? And why did the participants in JCP aggree to basically just indemnify Hibernate as a replacement for entity beans??? (NOT because they like the fact that this will give JBoss an advantage compared to the other J2EE servers).

Finally - why do the Java/J2EE vendors still stick together? Why do Sun, BEA, IBM, Oracle and now even JBoss still cooperate??? I tell you why - nothing makes a better aliance than a common enemy - especially if than common enemy is very powerful AND using every trick (even the dirty ones) to endager the existence of the participants of the oposing aliance.

Hail MS .NET - nothing could have a better effect on Java and J2EE!!!!

  Message #138901 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

TMC Completes Massive IBM J2EE / .NET Study

Posted by: javier castanon on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138855
The origin of the confision was the original positioning of J2EE from Sun: "the one platform you need, available from multiple vendors" (my paraphrase of course, but I think it is accurate). I guess the differences in implementations that you refer to, show that J2EE really isn't the same across all vendors. Hmmm, not vendor neutral eh? Interesting. . .
Interesting Dino? I'm sure it's for someone used to receive everything from the only one and true vendor. As far as I remember, functionally J2EE is the same regardless the vendor. Regarding non functional requirements, there are differences. Do you find it enough interesting? I could elaborate an example between .NET on Windows and Mono on Linux to explain me better.


Cheers

  Message #138904 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

TMC Completes Massive IBM J2EE / .NET Study

Posted by: Robert McIntosh on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138558
I use websphere on a daily basis and I can't stand it. I've used other app servers , including weblogic (when I used to be an instructor for TMC), JBoss, Gemstone and a few others here and there and websphere is a perfect example of a product that should have died a long, long time ago. If websphere had come from a company other than IBM it certainly would have. Only IBM's customer base allowed such a work of junk to stay alive. What is really sad is that MS can use this report as a general bashing of J2EE now that IBM is (depending on which reports you read) the leading vendor, regardless of what the title says. What is even more sad is that websphere uses a good number of good open source projects and products to make up websphere and still couldn't get it right. For example websphere is fronted with Apache's HTTP server (which is a bit unnecessary if you ask me and only slows down the requests for a JSP app), commons-logging, axis, jetspeed, jasper and a few others.

Having said all of that, I actually came from a VB background, back in the 5 - 6 days, and I personally wouldn't want to go back. I find all of the 'make java easier' essays a bunch of bull. I can pick a couple of different tools that will let me build a java/jsp app with the same relative ease as visual studio. Heck, even Dreamweaver which isn't even a java IDE can let me do that.

I don't think the problem is that Java is difficult, it is that the J2EE vendors try to cram the entire J2EE stack down your throat so you have to buy the high dollar version of their server, and then have round table discussions on how to increase developer productivity and compete with Microsoft. What is worse, is that there isn't even a fair comparison between J2EE and .Net. It should be between J2EE and .Net/MS Transaction server/MSMQ (I didn't read the code or the report details but I doubt the MS solution used these technologies). One thing Mircrosoft did right was not try to force their customers into using all possible portions of a technology stack, but only what they really needed. I recently built a small app with JSTL/JSP tags (gasp!!!) hitting mySQL and running on tomcat. Difficult? No. Time comsuming? Nope. Multi-tier wonder architecture? not even close. But it worked, worked well and met my requirements. Normally I would never do that as I am a fan of domain models and good architecture and good frameworks, but it was a quick, slightly dirty app that did exactly what I wanted. If I had used some IDE's RAD tool or worse an MDA tool, that amount of junk code that would have gotten spit out when have been a nightmare.

Maybe when the J2EE vendors stop trying to sell more than what customers need and start actually paying attention to what developers need and want (they say they do, but I highly doubt it) as well as providing easy to use tools, and I mean the app servers here not the IDEs, then maybe their developers' productivity will increase enough so that management will see this increase and keep buying licenses and tools from the vendors.

Speaking on ease of use, it takes 14+ clicks to deploy an EJB/war app on websphere. That is just rediculous. Compare that to dropping an ear file in a directory for JBoss and just restarting a web app takes 4+ clicks compared to Tomcats 1.

  Message #138905 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

TMC Completes Massive IBM J2EE / .NET Study

Posted by: a b on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138558
Wonderful[report from all angles of view ]
sometimes ago IBM published another report of comapresion between .Net and Webpshere
that report shown J2ee solution based on Ws is more cheaper and more effective than
.Net based solution
We should wait for IBM response to this report.

  Message #138908 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

I dont need to go to the report to find out who won!

Posted by: joe jenkins on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138558
To get these answers and to obtain the TMC final report, the independent auditor’s report, the system specification and the source code for the three implementations, go to:

I haven't read the report, but I would bet my last dollar that, because Microsoft is paying for it, TMC will find whatever Microsoft wants them to find. We have all seen this happen so many times that it is amaizing that Microsoft still bothers to do it.

  Message #138912 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

Wooooow - 50-70% code reduction?

Posted by: javier castanon on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138851
Nope, I think Soma was talking about server-side programming, where XAML is mostly client-side UI. There are some nice advances in ASP.NET that make common scenarios simpler and easier.
That's right. Use of ASP.NET forms is a very neat way to build web applications, so neat that the Java camp tried to emulate it via Java Server Faces. The relevance of the study of course have to do with the tools and frameworks you're using to build applications. If someone sets up an environment to compare a Java application that uses Hibernate and a .NET application that uses ADO.NET typed datasets (in order to emulate similar functionality when building DTOs, as shown in the Microsoft's patterns book) then the LOC counting would vary, but if you're not using Hibernate nor typed datasets, that's irrelevant to you. Of course, Microsoft loyalists would cry "That's not J2EE!!!". Mmhh, well, I think Java loyalists (zealots?) are more vocal, he, he ;-)

I've been doing some consulting in Java and .NET applications, and what I've learned is what is really portable, vendor neutral and vendor independent is our own developer's stupidity. It doesn't matter if you develop in Java nor .NET, the blockers have to do with processes and methodologies, nor technology.


Happy flamewar ;-)


Cheers

  Message #138914 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

Interesting Dino?

Posted by: Dino Chiesa on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138901
The origin of the confision was the original positioning of J2EE from Sun: "the one platform you need, available from multiple vendors" (my paraphrase of course, but I think it is accurate). I guess the differences in implementations that you refer to, show that J2EE really isn't the same across all vendors. Hmmm, not vendor neutral eh? Interesting. . .
Interesting Dino? I'm sure it's for someone used to receive everything from the only one and true vendor. As far as I remember, functionally J2EE is the same regardless the vendor.
Yep, J2EE is the same across those vendors - which means you get the same APIs. But those darn differences!
Regarding non functional requirements, there are differences. Do you find it enough interesting?
Yes, I guess that's my point. I find this very interesting and often overlooked. An API spec does not define a platform. Variances across Sun, BEA, IBM, and JBoss make real differences in practice - in things like security, failover, developer productivity. The current TMC study, and the reaction to the report, shows it.

Having the same API set - let's assume it provides bonafide 100% portability. Let's assume for the same of this discussion that nobody uses portals or platform or app-specific connectors, nobody uses a replicated caching such as is provided in JBoss, WebSphere and WebLogic but not specified in J2EE, nobody uses Web services (pre J2EE v1.4 there was no standard API or DD). Now once I build and deploy the app I am able to re-deploy it to another J2EE-compliant container yes? BUT, the app code is not the app. There is so much more: operational procedures, configuration settings, functional performance, how to set up clustering, the semantics of clustering in failure scenarios, and on and on. None of this is contained within any .java module. It is all "server specific". So J2EE is the same, but what is the real benefit if there are so many other differences? POSIX is the same, but does that mean AIX is hot-swappable for Solaris?
I could elaborate an example between .NET on Windows and Mono on Linux to explain me better.
Yes, I expect you would find similar issues in this pairing. Portability of application code might be "almost there" at least for most things, but what about all the other aspects?

Cheers, likewise!

  Message #138915 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

Why this study is garbage

Posted by: F U on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138833
Based on cost this study is garbage:
Because they choose WebSphere ND which supports clustering and EJBs. Well, then why did the study not use EJBs? To be fair the study should have choosen WebSphere Express which is considerably less expensive. Oh, and failover then is simply done via your load balancer (edge server, or HTTP server IBM HTTPD aka Apache). This requires that the wsad application was written as stateless, which they didn't ignoring many of the webservices/j2ee best practices.

Based on productivity this study is garbage:
-The developers didn't use an SCM with WSAD and 'had some false starts'.. well duh, if you don't use an SCM you should be shot.
-The .Net developers used the DataGrid control for paging tabular data, but did not use the equivalent features in WSAD (WSAD includes a JSF based table widgets that support paging at either the server or client level with no hand coding)
-The developer's were pretty close to ignorant. They copied the webservices.jar from the WSAD test environment into WAS ND? Are they trying to make their lives difficult? They replaced the IBM JRE with Sun's to make the JRE support a non-standard jvm argument? (PS. The IBM JRE handles garbage collection much better than Sun's which obviates the need for the non-standard gc parameter).
-If this truly was an IBM vs MSFT study then why was Sun's IDE used for the mobile aspects instead of IBM's Device Developer?
-Why did they 'experiment with verticle scaling' of WebSphere? Did horizontal not suffice (which it did)? Or were they trying to make sure every possible deployment option was tested thus ensuring the IBM solution was less productive?
-To improve performance the developer wrote an object pool. Hmm, that's nice, why not just enable some of the caching capabilities of WebSphere? Oh that's right, because then it'd take less time and perform better and support features unavailable in a .Net solution.
-They found session persistence too slow and spent time examining/tweaking things out.. Hmm, how slow is too slow? How big was their session? Both important aspects left out of the document, I'll have to look at the code to see why they had such problems. But, this is generally only broken when your sessions include too much information.
-I have no bloody idea what they are trying to do in their 'hot deployment' of websphere section. Sounds like they are copying parts of an application, but also restarting servers, then deploying to each server manually.. Really, the problem to me sounds like they don't have a clue. With WebSphere ND you don't need to do any of that garbage, its taken care of for you.

This study, like most studies are marketing funded garbage.

  Message #138917 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

TMC Completes Massive IBM J2EE / .NET Study

Posted by: Juozas Baliuka on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138558
Forget this J2EE / .NET crap , common business programming language is the future and this study proves it across multiple dimensions: developer productivity, manageability, reliability, and application performance.

http://www.infogoal.com/cbd/cbdz040.htm

  Message #138918 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

TMC Completes Massive IBM J2EE / .NET Study

Posted by: Mark Nuttall on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138904
+1

I came from a VB background too. Love Java and all that comes with it. I still do VB6 and also do VS.Net. Eclipse makes my life so much easier developing real applications.

  Message #138920 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

Not a fair comparison?

Posted by: Dino Chiesa on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138904
What is worse, is that there isn't even a fair comparison between J2EE and .Net. It should be between J2EE and .Net/MS Transaction server/MSMQ (I didn't read the code or the report details but I doubt the MS solution used these technologies).
Robert, no need for doubts. Read the report, because all of those things were in fact included in the study. Actually, you won't find "MS Transaction server" because it hasn't been called that for about 5 years. But look for COM+, and you will find what you suggest.
Maybe when the J2EE vendors stop trying to sell more than what customers need and start actually paying attention to what developers need and want (they say they do, but I highly doubt it) as well as providing easy to use tools, and I mean the app servers here not the IDEs, then maybe their developers' productivity will increase enough so that management will see this increase and keep buying licenses and tools from the vendors.
Interesting, again!

Pray tell, what incentive would IBM have for delivering something simple and easy, like Spring + Hibernate + AXIS?

  Message #138921 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

One(1) voice againd 1000's

Posted by: Rolf Tollerud on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138558
"the Microsoft results are based on a system running Visual Studio .Net running on Windows Server 2003 and costing $19,294. The IBM results are based on a system running WebSphere Network Deployment edition running on Red Hat Linux and costing $253,996."

From the Idiot, the Duracell, the Ninja, Poor Rolf, etc..

Best regards :)
Rolf Tollerud

  Message #138922 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

I dont need to go to the report to find out who won!

Posted by: Tyler Jewell on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138908
Hi Joe-

I can certainly understand the need for skepticism, but let me provide some relevancy on the work performed. I would hope that the community digs through the research to assess the effort instead of assuming that having a sponsor means there is bias. In fact, there are some dimensions of research that showed Microsoft not reflecting as well as IBM.

So, given the obvious scrutiny, why does TMC perform this research? Are we for sale? We are not paid to write what someone else wants. If you dig through the records on middleware-company.com and TSS, there have been a number of changes made to increase trust and credibility to the research and the process:

- New executive leadership team
- Research code of conduct published
- MiddlewareRESEARCH.com created with the purpose of distributing all artifacts with every research item
- Disclosures moved to page one so that full disclosure can occur
- Publication of specs and declarations of intended work to the community and third party experts so that they can provide input into the intended work and, in some cases, monitor the work.
- Ability for vendors to veto publication, but they have no input into what is authored

We welcome additional input on how to make this research more credible. And, while trust is individual and has to be earned, we are working hard to build a trust basis with the community.

While our early research efforts had us falling off the proverbial bike, our approach since has been to assess improvement areas, make positive changes and find a way to ride the bike without falling off. We believe that the industry is better served by TMC being a better research organization as opposed to running away when the going gets tough.

TMC performs this research because the questions are worthwhile. These are questions that the world (and us) would like to have answered -- and in many cases the expense of doing the research properly is significant and couldn't be done without a sponsor. The alternative would be to not have this data at all, which would leave the community speculating and making conjections. While this report isn't conclusive, it is data that the world didn't have before. The reports are a wonderful learning experience (the team documented every pitfall and nuance they had in deploying IBM on a Linux cluster in a production environment) and the data is useful when scrutinized in the context it was performed.

Tyler

  Message #138923 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

TMC Completes Massive IBM J2EE / .NET Study

Posted by: F U on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138904
I just realized that yeh, it is close to 14 clicks to install an EAR on WAS. Granted, it is more than dropping a file on the filesystem like jboss. But, if that is your largest complaint of not standing websphere then get real. It takes probably 45 seconds to click those 14 clicks while 30 seconds to copy a file across the network compared to the man years to make an application. I'd like to hear about your bigger beefs.

  Message #138924 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

I dont need to go to the report to find out who won!

Posted by: Dino Chiesa on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138908
I haven't read the report, but I would bet my last dollar that, because Microsoft is paying for it, TMC will find whatever Microsoft wants them to find. We have all seen this happen so many times that it is amaizing that Microsoft still bothers to do it.
Not having read the report, you wouldn't have seen section 1.4, which reads:
  1.4 Does a “sponsored study” always produce results favorable to the sponsor?

  No.

  Our arrangement with sponsors is that we will write only what we believe, and only what we can stand behind, but we allow them the option to prevent us from publishing the study if they feel it would be harmful publicity. We refuse to be influenced by the sponsor in the writing of this report. Sponsorship fees are not contingent upon the results. We make these constraints clear to sponsors up front and urge them to consider the constraints carefully before they commission us to perform a study.
  Message #138928 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

I dont need to go to the report to find out who won!

Posted by: Henrique Steckelberg on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138924
I haven't read the report, but I would bet my last dollar that, because Microsoft is paying for it, TMC will find whatever Microsoft wants them to find. We have all seen this happen so many times that it is amaizing that Microsoft still bothers to do it.
Not having read the report, you wouldn't have seen section 1.4, which reads:
  1.4 Does a “sponsored study” always produce results favorable to the sponsor?  No.  Our arrangement with sponsors is that we will write only what we believe, and only what we can stand behind, but we allow them the option to prevent us from publishing the study if they feel it would be harmful publicity. We refuse to be influenced by the sponsor in the writing of this report. Sponsorship fees are not contingent upon the results. We make these constraints clear to sponsors up front and urge them to consider the constraints carefully before they commission us to perform a study.
Are sponsors allowed to veto some parts of a study, or only the full report as a whole? If they can veto just some parts of it and at the same time allow for other parts, it would allow them to filter the bad things, and make up a report that shows only the good things, hiding the bad things from the press. Such a report wouldn't represent the truth.

Best Regards,
Henrique Steckelberg

  Message #138930 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

I dont need to go to the report to find out who won!

Posted by: Tyler Jewell on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138928
Are sponsors allowed to veto some parts of a study, or only the full report as a whole? If they can veto just some parts of it and at the same time allow for other parts, it would allow them to filter the bad things, and make up a report that shows only the good things, hiding the bad things from the press. Such a report wouldn't represent the truth.Best Regards,Henrique Steckelberg
Hi Henrique. It is the case that sponsors can only vetoe the entire report, not sections of it.

To date, there has been one research endeavor (of about 15 performed) where the vendor chose not to have the report published for consumption.

Tyler

  Message #138931 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

to defend the Websphere is to loose all credibility

Posted by: Rolf Tollerud on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138928
"OTOH, they say that Websphere/WSAD is a slow, unproductive and painful environnement. We can't really blame TSS, the whole community already knew that for a fact."

"Websphere (its cumbersome and clumsy nature is pretty much common knowledge"
Yes, we all know that. So why do you try to defend the hopeless Websphere application server?
(http://www.theserverside.com/news/thread.tss?thread_id=16610#65952)
"It is because of "products" like websphere that gives the whole industry a bad reputation and makes consulting a scam rather than a honorable profession."

"Next time they should test .NET against a real, productive J2EE environnement."

Yes exactly, for instance a Spring/Tomcat/J2EE stack. That should be this years test not Websphere/.NET, that should have been last years test.

Regards
Rolf Tollerud

  Message #138932 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

Can somebody using Spring/hibernate build a demo?

Posted by: ping Lu on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138931
Can somebody use Spring/hibernate or spring running in a J2EE server?

  Message #138935 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

Can somebody using Spring/hibernate build a demo?

Posted by: Dino Chiesa on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138932
Can somebody use Spring/hibernate or spring running in a J2EE server?
Wouldn't it be Spring instead of J2EE, not Spring inside of J2EE. There's a book called Better Faster Lighter Java by Bruce Tate the guy who wrote "Bitter EJB" that covers this.

  Message #138936 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

not dreamed up by well-meaning impractical theoreticians

Posted by: Rolf Tollerud on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138932
"Can somebody use Spring/hibernate or spring running in a J2EE server?"

Yes you can, but why? Spring can run the necessary J2EE components by itself.
That would be some competition! Win some loose some, photo finish, two first class professional systems spent against each other.

Excitement, verve.

But it is not going to happen. No one would sponsor it because no one would know what the winner would be.

  Message #138937 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

Spring inside web servlet container

Posted by: ping Lu on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138935
I mean deploy Spring inside one of web servlet container( such as tomcat or J2EE appServer weblogic/websphere), following the requrement

  Message #138938 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

Spring/Hibernate with J2EE app server

Posted by: Anjan Bacchu on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138932
Can somebody use Spring/hibernate or spring running in a J2EE server?
Hi There,

  Sure, you can do that. You can use Spring to interact with stateless EJBs. Further, you can interact with the DB layer using the Hibernate support.

BR,
~A

  Message #138939 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

Spring team need do this demo, make a case to those big guys

Posted by: ping Lu on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138936
"Can somebody use Spring/hibernate or spring running in a J2EE server?"Yes you can, but why? Spring can run the necessary J2EE components by itself.That would be some competition! Win some loose some, photo finish, two first class professional systems spent against each other. Excitement, verve.But it is not going to happen. No one would sponsor it because no one would know what the winner would be.
I think spring team need to do this, it will make a case. I read develop J2EE withou EJB, it made a case, pretty good.
This time will make spring more popular!!!

  Message #138946 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

Are sponsors allowed to veto some parts of a study?

Posted by: Philippe Marcus on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138930
Are sponsors allowed to veto some parts of a study, or only the full report as a whole? If they can veto just some parts of it and at the same time allow for other parts, it would allow them to filter the bad things, and make up a report that shows only the good things, hiding the bad things from the press. Such a report wouldn't represent the truth.
Well it would be helpful if TSS clears out what their connection with Microsoft is? That is beyond being business partners... I realize microsoft sponsors the theserverside.net community site..what else do we not know about?

I think this piece of information is useful.

Tyler: remember when you hold the camera itself you are providing biased news depending upon where you turn the camera. In this case the camera is sponsored by Microsoft.

I can see TSS increasingly wanting to become an analyst like firm -- a new business venture. GOOD LUCK! that is all I can say...

  Message #138947 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

TSS - your enterprise .nOT .JAVA but .net community...

Posted by: Philippe Marcus on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138946
blockquote>TSS increasingly wanting to become an analyst like firm -- a new business venture. GOOD LUCK! that is all I can say...TSS - your enterprise .nOT .JAVA but .net community...

  Message #138948 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

Why this study is garbage - is it?

Posted by: Dino Chiesa on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138915
I would like to see a response from IBM on the study. Until then I'll reserve judgement on whether it is garbage. But clearly some of your comments are off base.
Based on cost this study is garbage:Because they choose WebSphere ND which supports clustering and EJBs. Well, then why did the study not use EJBs?
The WebSphere implementation did use EJBs. Page 38 says the RRD implementation used MDBs. Following pages say the WSAD implementation also used MDBs, and page 57 says the Customer Service app wrapped JMS with Session Beans.
To be fair the study should have choosen WebSphere Express which is considerably less expensive. Oh, and failover then is simply done via your load balancer (edge server, or HTTP server IBM HTTPD aka Apache). This requires that the wsad application was written as stateless, which they didn't ignoring many of the webservices/j2ee best practices.
Using the lower-cost Express version would have been an option except for the use of EJBs and clustering, neither of which is supported in Express. And Whoops! isn't Express suppoted on machines with up to only 2 CPUs. But this test bed was 4x4p. I think the reason they used Edge Server and not IHS for the load balancing is to get the failover. Also is it not the case that Edge Server is not available separately, and is licensed only with the higher-cost WAS ND?

For all these reasons, it looks like WAS ND was in fact required for this test and the pricing comparison looks valid to me.
Based on productivity this study is garbage:-The developers didn't use an SCM with WSAD and 'had some false starts'.. well duh, if you don't use an SCM you should be shot.
Strange, because they used a SCM with RRD. In any case, this aspect was probably overshadowed by the productivity advantage inherent in having already done the work. By the time they started with WSAD, they had built the app once with RRD.
The .Net developers used the DataGrid control for paging tabular data, but did not use the equivalent features in WSAD (WSAD includes a JSF based table widgets that support paging at either the server or client level with no hand coding)
Would have been nice to see how much benefit there is to the JSF stuff. I didn't see any mention of JSF in the report document.
They copied the webservices.jar from the WSAD test environment into WAS ND? Are they trying to make their lives difficult?
Who knows, but doesn't the report imply that this fixed something?
They replaced the IBM JRE with Sun's to make the JRE support a non-standard jvm argument? (PS. The IBM JRE handles garbage collection much better than Sun's which obviates the need for the non-standard gc parameter).
Yep, that was obviously an error. But in any case, they did not run in this configuration. They went back to the original IBM JRE quickly.
If this truly was an IBM vs MSFT study then why was Sun's IDE used for the mobile aspects instead of IBM's Device Developer?
For the mobile app, it would be interesting to see if IBM’s Device Developer is more productive than Sun One Mobile Studio. It might be, but it might not be. Is there synergy between RRD and WebSphere Device Developer? But this was just a small part of the app anyway.
Why did they 'experiment with verticle scaling' of WebSphere? Did horizontal not suffice (which it did)? Or were they trying to make sure every possible deployment option was tested thus ensuring the IBM solution was less productive?
There was a time when it was a best practice among Java app vendors to install multiple instances of a JVM on a particular box, because of the anomalous behavior of the garbage collector when dealing with large heaps. Basically, with multi-gigabyte heaps in a single JVM, the world would stop while the GC happened. I haven't seen the recent guidance from IBM on whether this still applies. Maybe the Websphere team hadn't seen it either. I assume IBM would have fixed this in a recent JVM, but it's good to be sure.
To improve performance the developer wrote an object pool. Hmm, that's nice, why not just enable some of the caching capabilities of WebSphere? Oh that's right, because then it'd take less time and perform better and support features unavailable in a .Net solution.
Regarding caching, there were strict requirements on app disallowing caching of database info -- all info had to be fresh from the database. (No Option A caching here)
They found session persistence too slow and spent time examining/tweaking things out.. Hmm, how slow is too slow? How big was their session? Both important aspects left out of the document, I'll have to look at the code to see why they had such problems. But, this is generally only broken when your sessions include too much information.
This seems to be a complaint about the results they saw, and now how they dealt with them? What's the point here?
I have no bloody idea what they are trying to do in their 'hot deployment' of websphere section. Sounds like they are copying parts of an application, but also restarting servers, then deploying to each server manually.. Really, the problem to me sounds like they don't have a clue. With WebSphere ND you don't need to do any of that garbage, its taken care of for you.
The study report references the WebSphere document that describes the steps they tried to follow to do the hot deployment. But it would be good to get more commentary on this piece from the team members?
This study, like most studies are marketing funded garbage.
Suum cuique.

In the end, I think the report stands as a valuable contribution. Sure there were some problems, on both teams, in both implementations. Things could have been done better, as with any project. Generally speaking though, it represents a large project successfully executed, and the experiences and observations TMC reported seem quite valid, and reflective of the typical experiences of a project team, despite those problems.

  Message #138949 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

Agreed with you, Ramus

Posted by: Renat Zubairov on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138900
Agreed with you, Ramus, this .NET vs J2EE comparison shows the weaknesses of J2EE let's find and accept them, only through this we can avoid them..

  Message #138950 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

not dreamed up by well-meaning impractical theoreticians

Posted by: Ghanshyam Patel on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138936
"Spring can run the necessary J2EE components by itself."

While Spring would certainly have been a more interesting choice, the study would then be "Spring v/s .Net", which is not of much consequence to MS, is it? :-)

Besides, 2PC seems to have been a requirement here, since they used an XA driver. That's the kind of stuff where the "well-meaning impractical theoreticians" reign. Spring is wise to not bite more than it can chew.

  Message #138953 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

MS has had a great impact on Java / J2EE

Posted by: Jeremy Barkan on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138900
Mainsoft has a cool product that uses Visual Studio .NET for J2EE development.

http://www.mainsoft.com/products/vmw_j2ee.html

 It's completely integrated into VS, and even supports some popular 3rd party .NET components. They are then able to cross compile to Java Byte code and run on a Mono stack built to run on J2EE. Websphere, Weblogic and JBoss are all supported. I tried it out with their Petstore sample app, and it was very smooth. Their solution also makes integration with EJB's seemless, with no bridging.

 

While I agree that the WSAD version did not take advantage of all of the J2EE advantages that WSAD simplifies [ JSF, EJBs ], the .NET features are indeed very easy to use in Visual Studio. The Mainsoft solution lets you leverage it for J2EE nicely. In fact - you don't need two teams with different skill sets to code up a .NET version and a J2EE version.

 

No doubt Microsoft and IBM will continue to slug out the productivity advantages of one or the other development technologies in these studies. It's nice to have the ability to use both technologies to our advantage, in the meantime...

  Message #138955 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

Why this study is garbage - is it?

Posted by: Hernan Parra on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138948
Hi Dino,

Are you the guy who works for Microsoft as says in this link?: http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?DinoChiesa

Glad to meet you.

  Message #138958 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

WebSphere wrong flag bearer

Posted by: Jason Carreira on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138558
From the eWeek article:
For building some enterprise applications, it took developers 195 man-hours with WebSphere, whereas building the same applications using Visual Studio took only 94 man-hours, Somasegar said the study said. Application server installation and configuration took 22 man-hours in the WebSphere environment and only 4 man-hours in the Microsoft environment.
That's all very impressive, except I could do the same comparison between WebLogic and WebSphere and get similar results, if not better. I tell people from my experience of developing the same app against both WLS and WS that it's about a factor of 2 less productive in WS. Switch to Resin and with Spring and no EJBs and you'll get another 30-40% improvement. The problem is WS, not Java or J2EE.

  Message #138963 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

come on Richard..

Posted by: Rolf Tollerud on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138558
Now it is only needed that Richard Öberg writes something he calls "the IBM Webstore/.NET Study Revisited" where he makes umpteen arguments why the test was unfair, each weighing 0.0001 gram, whereupon the Java community will jointly exclaim "Rickard Öberg has written a first-class critique of the IBM Webstore/.NET benchmark" and that he in his analysis "tears apart many of the claims made by The Middleware Company (TMC)". :)

Regards
Rolf Tollerud

  Message #138964 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

Another "Get The FUD" nonsense from Microsoft

Posted by: B B on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138833
When I saw the title, the first question that came to my mind was who sponsored it. As usual the big M$

  Message #138966 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

Interesting Dino?

Posted by: javier castanon on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138914
Dino,

Thank you very much for a reasoned response. I'm not going to do a Java apologie, but perhaps to give you more ammunition against the Java world. Sincerely, I believe there are some points in your dissertation that bark at the wrong tree.
Regarding non functional requirements, there are differences. Do you find it enough interesting?
Yes, I guess that's my point. I find this very interesting and often overlooked. An API spec does not define a platform.
I agree. I believe a platform is defined by: 1) Technology, 2) Frameworks 3) Tools. You have in the Microsoft world the three things standardized due there is a one major proveider for the three.

But the same occurs in the Java world, do you know? When I migrated from Java to .NET I found the .NET framework very comprehensive and a very well thought thing. But also I missed the strong and huge community platform support. In the Java camp, people doesn't depend on one sole company nor API spec to make things. There are a lot of alternatives. So even if many key pieces of a modern IT puzzle could be missing, there are often more than one alternative. Of course, this raises the bar for begineers, so it could be used as an argument against Java platform as a whole: there are many alternatives, besides "official" providers.

Sadly, I'm aware that this doesn't make a good marketing scenario.
Variances across Sun, BEA, IBM, and JBoss make real differences in practice - in things like security, failover, developer productivity. The current TMC study, and the reaction to the report, shows it.
Not so much Dino. Let me tell you something, I know some major global companies that use JBoss and Eclipse/Netbeans for development and BEA (or another J2EE server) for production. And of course there are deployment problems and idiosincracies, but nevertheless they are sovable in a reasonable amount of time. Remember also, that much development is done on Windows and deployment in *ix machines. That's a living probe of the portability mantra.
Having the same API set - let's assume it provides bonafide 100% portability. ... Now once I build and deploy the app I am able to re-deploy it to another J2EE-compliant container yes? BUT, the app code is not the app. There is so much more: operational procedures, configuration settings, functional performance, how to set up clustering, the semantics of clustering in failure scenarios, and on and on. None of this is contained within any .java module. It is all "server specific". So J2EE is the same, but what is the real benefit if there are so many other differences?
It depends on who do you look at it. It could be seean as a disadvatange or as a clear separation of concerns between development time duties and deployment time duties. Most programmers use to ignore this simple fact, and don't think their programs in terms of "deploymentability". }

Tasks you've mentioned have to be accomplished no matter if you use Perl, Java, .NET or whatever environment. The fact that in .NET those tasks are performed in a some kind unique fashion, doesn't imply they don't have to be implemented. If they are defined as metadata inside a source code file or as an external XML file, is an implementation decision made by the platform stewards.

For example (since you agreed to use some .NET/Mono comparison) many concerns you mentioned refer to issues addressed in System.EntepriseServices namespace, not implemented in Mono. These are addressed in the form of tools and frameworks, name it IIS or Windows, but is hard to tell where .NET as techonology ends and where IIS-Windows begin. Security in .NET apps is managed via IIS. How do you accomplish this in Mono? Using Mono specific ways. So, how much is this different in the Java planet? Which is the real benefit for developers that C# and colateral are an ECMA standard? I'm afraid the same as Java. What do you think?


Cheers


Javier

  Message #138967 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

Can somebody using Spring/hibernate build a demo?

Posted by: javier castanon on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138935
Can somebody use Spring/hibernate or spring running in a J2EE server?
Wouldn't it be Spring instead of J2EE, not Spring inside of J2EE. There's a book called Better Faster Lighter Java by Bruce Tate the guy who wrote "Bitter EJB" that covers this.
Dino, I wish many sales representatives (Microsoft, Oracle, IBM, don't ask me for names, I have to protect the guilties) where as informed about the competition as you. Believe me, they are not. Also, even as you work for whom you work for, I believe your opinions are more balanced than others expressed by Microsoft trolls daunting here (not to mention java zealots)


Cheers.

  Message #138969 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

Are you the guy who works for Microsoft?

Posted by: Dino Chiesa on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138955
Hi Dino,Are you the guy who works for Microsoft as says in this link?: http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?DinoChiesaGlad to meet you.
YES, that's me. I have worked for Microsoft for the past 5 years.
I apologize - I should have been signing my posts.

Dino
Microsoft

  Message #138970 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

WebSphere wrong flag bearer

Posted by: Nick Minutello on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138958
I could do the same comparison between WebLogic and WebSphere and get similar results.
The problem is WS, not Java or J2EE.
Except thats not how the headlines are going to play it.

"Websphere is the market leading Application Server!" they will say.
If only people knew what lengths IBM go to to prop up their sales numbers... (I know of companies with just several cpu's in production that account for 100's cpus in "sales"... and IBM pay them to take them)

My conclusions:
It seems as though the guys using Webphere werent really that familiar with it - which doesnt make for a fair Websphere vs .Net comparison.

I am somewhat amazed at two facts though:
a) trying to use SunJVM tuning params on the IBM JVM
b) trying to use Websphere on the sun JRE.
Anyone who knows the first thing about the sun/ibm JVM's and Websphere know that these are ludicrous things to suggest - let alone spend time on...
Firstly jvm option starting with -XX is JVM specific. Duh!
Secondly, anyone who knows the first thing about Websphere knows that its tied to the IBM ORB implementation in its jvm.
This is Java/Websphere 101 stuff...
While two IBM consultants were used for "initial tuning", it seems they didnt stick around much.

Therefore, I am not surprised at the outcome. The Websphere.* development stack is a pain to work with if you havent spent some time with the product and have an intuitive feel for the IBM-ness - and learn where to find stuff. I have been there, and I know what its like. Their website is a piece if shite when it comes to finding stuff on it. Not even the IBM consultants know where to find half the stuff.

That said:
No-one in their right mind uses WSAD for development.
Nor do they use Websphere in development.
The development round-trip for both of these is crap. You may have a J2EE server built into the IDE - but it doesnt take the same patches/fixes, so your screwed if, say, there is a bug that stops sitemesh working...
We deploy on Webfear, but we use tomcat/orion + IntelliJ for dev.
Where we use Weblogic (production and dev) + IntelliJ , we get similar results to the tomcat/orion+IntelliJ combo....

That said, VS.Net does have a very low barrier to startup.
There is one fuck-off install - and it just works - there is nowhere near the pain that you have with the Websphere.* development stack.

Unless of course your IT Security policy is such that you cannot install IIS on your desktop (due to Nimda-style risks). Then you have to install IIS on a server and resort to very hacky work-arounds that dont scale beyond 1 developer.
I suspect details like this dont make it into TMC's report :-)


The bottom line for the J2EE industry is that IBM is making everyone in it look bad.
I wonder when they are going to pull their head out of their collective asses and realize it.


-Nick

  Message #138971 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

Can somebody using Spring/hibernate build a demo?

Posted by: Henrique Steckelberg on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138967
Either some people here are still missing what J2EE means (mixing it with EJB), or they are missing what Spring is. J2EE is a bunch of services with a standard API: servlets, JSP, EJB, etc. Spring is an Application API, it is NOT an application server. It does NOT substitute J2EE services, it leverages them. So yes, you may run Spring on top of a J2EE server, but being modular, you can also use its APIs on a standalone program, with no J2EE service at all if you don't need them. For example, a simple client-server Swing application accessing a DB through Hibernate could use Spring APIs for that, no J2EE at all.

So no, Spring is not the end all, be all J2EE substitute. It is a layer that you can put on your J2EE to make your life easier. If you need caching, distributed transactions, messaging, and other J2EE services, Spring won't give it to you, you'll still have to use a J2EE server or similar Open Source tools, and add Spring on top of it if you'd like to.

PS: seems like Rolf de la Mancha got himself some professional assistance here on the forum! :)

Best Regards,
Henrique Steckelberg

  Message #138973 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

Interesting Dino?

Posted by: Dino Chiesa on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138966
Javier, I am very intrigued by this dialogue.
I agree. I believe a platform is defined by: 1) Technology, 2) Frameworks 3) Tools. You have in the Microsoft world the three things standardized due there is a one major proveider for the three. But the same occurs in the Java world, do you know? When I migrated from Java to .NET I found the .NET framework very comprehensive and a very well thought thing. But also I missed the strong and huge community platform support. In the Java camp, people doesn't depend on one sole company nor API spec to make things. There are a lot of alternatives. So even if many key pieces of a modern IT puzzle could be missing, there are often more than one alternative. Of course, this raises the bar for begineers, so it could be used as an argument against Java platform as a whole: there are many alternatives, besides "official" providers. Sadly, I'm aware that this doesn't make a good marketing scenario.
Yes, my take agrees with yours here. There are many many choices in the Java world, and in some cases the existence of choices is very good. And in some cases there are so many choices that it is actually a disadvantage. For an example of choices at the architectural (or what you have called the technology) level, look at Servlets, along with EJB stateful Session Beans - isn't there some overlap here? Or, for an example of choices at the product level, look at tools: JBuilder, JDeveloper, Eclipse, Workshop, IntelliJ, and even JDE for Emacs. Lots and lots of choices, which is good, but the downside is there is not a single community of tools plugin providers (the Java Tools Community attempts to address this), and a second downside is that there is not a single, common skills base.

  Interesting - the industry apparently desires a standard in tools, judging from the consolidation that seems to be occurring behind Eclipse.
Variances across Sun, BEA, IBM, and JBoss make real differences in practice - in things like security, failover, developer productivity. The current TMC study, and the reaction to the report, shows it.
Not so much Dino. Let me tell you something, I know some major global companies that use JBoss and Eclipse/Netbeans for development and BEA (or another J2EE server) for production. And of course there are deployment problems and idiosincracies, but nevertheless they are sovable in a reasonable amount of time. Remember also, that much development is done on Windows and deployment in *ix machines. That's a living probe of the portability mantra.
No doubt that Java has provided the cross-compiling capability for enterprise apps (used to be only an embedded systems concept). Develop on Windows and deploy on Unix. In fact, seems to me this addressed a huge issue for the unix world, which was: Unix systems were expensive, and you couldn't outfit a large team of devs with *nix workstations without spending a large premium. Linux changes this today, but 4 years ago, the Java cross-compile capability really addressed this nicely. In other words, use the cheap Windows workstation to develop apps for an expensive *nix (Java) server.

And I am also not doubting the portability between JBoss and WebLogic (or you pick the pair), if you stick to the portable API set. And this is especially nice when you are talking about dev/test on JBoss and system test (+later deployment) on WebLogic.

BUT.... I still believe the code is not the app. Portable code does not make a portable app. It is not possible to just pick up an ear and drop it into a different container and say, "Boom, it's ported."
So J2EE is the same, but what is the real benefit if there are so many other differences?
It depends on who do you look at it. It could be seean as a disadvatange or as a clear separation of concerns between development time duties and deployment time duties. Most programmers use to ignore this simple fact, and don't think their programs in terms of "deploymentability". }Tasks you've mentioned have to be accomplished no matter if you use Perl, Java, .NET or whatever environment. The fact that in .NET those tasks are performed in a some kind unique fashion, doesn't imply they don't have to be implemented.
Absolutely so. Every app needs to deal with these issues. I am not saying that .NET includes some magic that eliminates these aspects. Instead the point is that, even if you have a portable API subset (J2EE), the differences in these areas make for real distinctions between products. In other words, J2EE is not a platform. To consider a platform, you need to look at a specific vendor implementation, with the items 1, 2, and 3 that you mentioned above, and all the specific implications of those items.
{...discussion of Mono versus .NET ...} So, how much is this different in the Java planet? Which is the real benefit for developers that C# and colateral are an ECMA standard? I'm afraid the same as Java. What do you think? Cheers, Javier
I think the situations are quite parallel. C# and CLI as ECMA standards do not consistitute a platform, at least not if you are looking for an enterprise app software platform. Mono is an attempt, as I understand it, to reproduce .NET on a Linux (er, non-Windows) base. But it will differ from .NET in all the ways you have cited, and probably more. The promise of app portability (not just API portability) is a difficult one to fulfill. It has been tried many times and the only time it works is when a single vendor fulfills the promise. Eg, Oracle is portable across Sun, AIX, Windows, and Linux. Or, WebSphere is portable across Linux, Windows and HPUX. BUT, a J2EE-app is not, in practice, going to be truly portable across WebLogic, JBoss, WebSphere, and Oracle.

I am pretty darn sure that this thread wasn't supposed to be discussing portability. but the question of "Is it J2EE or is it WebSphere?" raises the question of just what is J2EE and what does it really give me?

Dino
Microsoft

  Message #138974 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

TMC Completes Massive IBM J2EE / .NET Study

Posted by: Jason Carreira on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138923
I just realized that yeh, it is close to 14 clicks to install an EAR on WAS. Granted, it is more than dropping a file on the filesystem like jboss. But, if that is your largest complaint of not standing websphere then get real. It takes probably 45 seconds to click those 14 clicks while 30 seconds to copy a file across the network compared to the man years to make an application. I'd like to hear about your bigger beefs.
Compared to the 5 seconds to redeploy in Resin... Times 50x per day I do it... Times 15 developers = 500 minutes lost productivity per day = 2500 minutes / week = over 40 hours of lost productivity per week = over 1 person's time. Sounds significant to me.

  Message #138976 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

TMC Completes Massive IBM J2EE / .NET Study

Posted by: Robert Dean on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138867
Why ? Because you do not like results of study ? :))I'm involved now in a project using ASP.NET, and I must say, I enjoy environment (VS), language (C#), framework (ASP.NET) and loads of exelent third-party components and tools (Resharper, Intragistic, Deklarit...)Besides open source movenent getting momentum in dotnet (NUnit, Nant, NHibernate, NSpring)Aren't you guys pro-choice ?
The problem isn't so much the results of the study, but that the methodology can be *easily* picked apart.

The study makes overtures toward the scientific method, and yet it falls flat in one of the first choices: a team of 2 .net developers vs. a team of 2 J2EE developers. This may have been dictated by budgetary requirements, but it makes it nearly impossible to create a scientifically valid study. Even if the pairs had equivalent credentials, they may have different ability levels. It was also clear that the particular J2EE team had little, if any, experience on the WebSphere software, whereas the .Net team had plenty of experience on the application server software. Even if J2EE deliverables are mostly portable, the application servers are different, and it doesn't make sense to allow experts on the .Net platform and then turn around and set WebSphere amateurs as experts on that software.

This one deficiency may account for much of the difference in results.

  Message #138977 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

WebSphere wrong flag bearer

Posted by: Steve Wilkes on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138970
IMHO, having been part of this project, my best experience WAS with using WSAD. It proved to be a pretty sweet development environment for all the code intensive tasks of the WSAD version of the app. And the test WS environment proved to be very efficient for testing (minimal startup time, hot redeploy of apps, etc). The downside for productivity was lack of wizards / helpers for the persistence framework (only Entity Beans have such things).

If you take a look at our handcrafted architecture (not the RRD part, we really had to go with what RRD produced for that) you will see we tried to make it perform as well as possible. We only used JSP, Servlets, JNDI lookup (of data sources, queues), MDBs, JTA and JDBC. No Session or Entity Beans. We managed our own transactions where needed and that worked very nicely.

The only objects put into the users sessions were those required by the specification: the User object and batched tickets for submission over messaging. Session replication was needed to ensure these persisted in case of failover.

Other technologies were considered for the various layers.

For presentation we thought about Struts or JSF, but past experience had shown a performance degradation compared with JSP/Servlets, despite a slight productivity improvement. Similarly with Persistence. You can't really get anything to perform faster (if caching is not allowed) than writing your own prepared statements. You may get producivity improvements with Hibernate or JDO, but for this application that would have been unnecessary overkill.

The best performer was the messaging piece. WebSphere MQ with a JMS interface and MDBs beat the pants off MS MQ.

It WOULD be really interesting to see how the same application running in BEA WebLogic, JBoss or other app server performed...

  Message #138978 Post reply Post reply Post reply Go to top Go to top Go to top

to be smart - is not to be wrong

Posted by: Alex V on September 21, 2004 in response to Message #138974
Look, we have more or less clear result and clear message to
managers and stakeholders - MS (NET) is better than IBM (J2EE)
I can tell you - it works! first TSS study did influenced
our bosses. And we narrowly escape from NET under
"only Oracle" cover.

Yes, suprise!, M$ oursmart J@EE comunity : 4 processors to
forse expensive level of WS, inviting not the best J@EE player
(as they say, I have no experience with IBM). Whatever...
They pay, they order the music and win in a honest competition.
Been a swing champion do not hope to win waltz competition...

Ok, lets make swing competition, play rock-and-roll with intelij+
hiberspring on resin, ADF/JSF on Oracle-Orion, eclipse+ibatis on tomcat,
yes, LAMP is fine. All under heavy metal tranctional load.
...Just a second..and for M$ we will run "Smoke on the water" and
see Rolf dancing waltz.

Alex V.