SAP, Europe's biggest software group, has decided not to use Microsoft's .Net software platform and is instead planning to adopt Sun's J2EE architecture. SAP's move is likely to be a blow to Microsoft, as the German group has one of the largest customer bases of any business software developer.
Read SAP chooses J2EE over .NET
They don't just want to use J2EE. They actually have a wholly owned subsidiary called In-Q-My that develops their own Appserver. Have a look at http://www.inqmy.com/
It would be really interesting to see a review of it here at theserverside.
Looks to me like this *IS* a J2EE app. server.
I've covered it in my draft overview of the appserver market. Click here
to browse to the thread.
Are you an employee at Volvo in Goteborg? My name is Jim Bole. Please drop me an email at jim at infravio dot com, I'd love to catch up.
Best - Jim
Anyone see the benchmarks comparing the .Net implementation of Sun's Pet Store? Is this some marketing gimmick or did Microsoft actually pull it off?
Bench marking is Bench marking, one can always beet other with a twist, so don't pay much attention to it.
The most important thing to remember is that J2EE is really an open source technology while ".NET" as all other Microsoft technologies(e.g. COM) are open in theory but not in reality.
The most beautiful and overlooked feature of Java platform is learn once and apply any where, on the other hand Microsoft wastes everybody's time and money to reinvent the wheel. And that is what they are trying to do with .NET.
Er, Java is NOT open source! It's owned and maintained by Sun Microsystems, ref. http://java.sun.com
Er, Java is NOT open source!
I cannot wait to see another thread about J2EE licensing for open source appservers ;)
Of course Java isn't open-source. Thats like calling C++ open-source. Java is just a platform/language that happens to be owned by Sun. However, you're free to write open-source applications, tools, and application servers using Java.
And the reason SAP chose Java and J2EE is simple - using MS tools while competing with MS is like sleeping with the Devil. Eventually its going to come back and bite you in the butt.
What? Of course you can write open source apps in .Net. And in the language of your choice, I guess...
I stand corrected - you can open-source your work as long as it doesn't force the MS distributables to also be open-sourced.
Or at least, thats what I think the following says (taken from the MICROSOFT ASP.NET GO LIVE LICENSE AGREEMENT):
"OPEN SOURCE: Recipient warrants that (i) an Application including Redistributables, in whole or in part, created by Recipient hereunder will not incorporate, be combined or distributed with, and (ii) Recipient will not use in the development of such Applications, other software which is licensed pursuant to terms that (a) create, or purport to create, obligations for Microsoft with respect to the Redistributables, in whole or in part, or derivative work thereof or (b) grant, or purport to grant, Microsoft's intellectual property or proprietary rights in the Redistributables, in whole or in part, or derivative work thereof. By way of example but not limitation of the foregoing, Recipient warrants that (a) an Application will not incorporate, be combined or distributed with Publicly Available Software in whole or in part, and (b) Recipient will not use Publicly Available Software in the development of any part of such Application in a manner that may subject the Redistributables or derivative thereof, in whole or in part, to all or part of the license obligations of any Publicly Available Software. "Publicly Available Software" means each of (i) any software that contains, or is derived in any manner (in whole or in part) from, any software that is distributed as free software, open source software (e.g. Linux) or similar licensing or distribution models; and (ii) any software that requires as a condition of use, modification and/or distribution of such software that such software or other software incorporated into, derived from or distributed with such software (a) be disclosed or distributed in source code form; (b) be licensed for the purpose of making derivative works; or (c) be redistributable without charge.
Publicly Available Software includes, without limitation, software licensed or distributed under any of the following licenses or distribution models, or licenses or distribution models similar to any of the following: (a) GNU's General Public License (GPL) or Lesser/Library GPL (LGPL), (b) The Artistic License (e.g., PERL), (c) the Mozilla Public License, (d) the Netscape Public License, (e) the Sun Community Source License (SCSL), (f) the Sun Industry Source License (SISL), and (g) the Apache Server license."
there was a whole thread on that a week or 2 ago right here.
the underhandedness of this benchmark is absolutely intriguing.
I understand the .NET results were obtained using stored procedures, not really a fair comparison.
"...[SAP] spokesman Bill Wohl said SAP will let users of its software choose whichever architecture they want.
'There is no one over the other,' Wohl said. 'What we're saying is we're going to embrace the two, not one over the other.'"
"SAP has decided to use the Java language internally along with our own internal language, called ABAP. But it's important to distinguish that this is not a commercial decision: it doesn't mean that we won't support .Net. We will continue to support both Java and .Net. We are open in that respect," said SAP spokesman Gerhard Rickes.
can someone please post the link to the articles related to sap's endorsment of j2ee and their recommendation of websphere.