<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>











<rss version="2.0" xmlns:jf="http://www.jivesoftware.com/xmlns/jiveforums/rss">



<channel>
    <title>Support Forums: Message List - Updates to &amp;quot;New Life for EJB&amp;quot; Critique of EJB 3.0</title>
    <link>http://www.theserverside.com</link>
    <description>Most recent forum messages</description>
    <language>en</language>
    
        <generator>Jive Forums Silver 5.5.30 (www.jivesoftware.com)</generator>
    
    <pubDate>Sun, 19 May 2013 17:39:06 -0400</pubDate>


    <item>

        <title>Coupling seems to be the fundamental issue</title>
        <link>http://www.theserverside.com/discussions/thread.tss?thread_id=28371</link>

        

        
            <description><![CDATA[Well, we have seen a similar solution already and it's universally bad as in &quot;DLL Hell!&quot;]]></description>
        

        <pubDate>Tue, 07 Sep 2004 16:23:37 -0400</pubDate>

        

        <jf:creationDate>Tue, 07 Sep 2004 16:23:37 -0400</jf:creationDate>
        <jf:modificationDate>Tue, 07 Sep 2004 16:23:37 -0400</jf:modificationDate>
        <jf:date>Sep 7, 2004</jf:date>
        <jf:author>Abhijit Deb</jf:author>
        <jf:replyCount>0</jf:replyCount>
    </item>


    <item>

        <title>DTO oxymoron</title>
        <link>http://www.theserverside.com/discussions/thread.tss?thread_id=28371</link>

        

        
            <description><![CDATA[Not got much time, so I'll be brief. Emphasis on re-useable enterprise components, was how ejbs where pitched back in the day (I remember I was there). This doesn't sit so well with the current Agile Trend towards building the &quot;simplest thing...]]></description>
        

        <pubDate>Thu, 02 Sep 2004 02:53:21 -0400</pubDate>

        

        <jf:creationDate>Thu, 02 Sep 2004 02:53:21 -0400</jf:creationDate>
        <jf:modificationDate>Thu, 02 Sep 2004 02:53:21 -0400</jf:modificationDate>
        <jf:date>Sep 2, 2004</jf:date>
        <jf:author>Paul Beckford</jf:author>
        <jf:replyCount>0</jf:replyCount>
    </item>


    <item>

        <title>Updates to &amp;quot;New Life for EJB&amp;quot; Critique of EJB 3.0</title>
        <link>http://www.theserverside.com/discussions/thread.tss?thread_id=28371</link>

        

        
            <description><![CDATA[I think the authors sacrifice ease (developer-friendlyness) of use a lot.<br><br>I work with a framework which forces me to make a interface for every business object. I cannot simply use a implementation. Because methods are added or removed to the...]]></description>
        

        <pubDate>Thu, 02 Sep 2004 01:59:25 -0400</pubDate>

        

        <jf:creationDate>Thu, 02 Sep 2004 01:59:25 -0400</jf:creationDate>
        <jf:modificationDate>Thu, 02 Sep 2004 01:59:25 -0400</jf:modificationDate>
        <jf:date>Sep 2, 2004</jf:date>
        <jf:author>Hans Schw?bli</jf:author>
        <jf:replyCount>0</jf:replyCount>
    </item>


    <item>

        <title>Coupling seems to be the fundamental issue</title>
        <link>http://www.theserverside.com/discussions/thread.tss?thread_id=28371</link>

        

        
            <description><![CDATA[This is not entirely true. One of the advantages of separating Service interfaces from core application components is to support multiple versions of Service interface to exist. In the Web Services context, you could have multiple WSDLs, or use a Service...]]></description>
        

        <pubDate>Wed, 01 Sep 2004 17:28:47 -0400</pubDate>

        

        <jf:creationDate>Wed, 01 Sep 2004 17:28:47 -0400</jf:creationDate>
        <jf:modificationDate>Wed, 01 Sep 2004 17:28:47 -0400</jf:modificationDate>
        <jf:date>Sep 1, 2004</jf:date>
        <jf:author>Raman Raja</jf:author>
        <jf:replyCount>1</jf:replyCount>
    </item>


    <item>

        <title>Coupling seems to be the fundamental issue</title>
        <link>http://www.theserverside.com/discussions/thread.tss?thread_id=28371</link>

        

        
            <description><![CDATA[<blockquote>Raman,It is very limiting to take such a &quot;single-application&quot; view of EJB.Remember the original design intent of EJB:We were meant to be able to buy EJBs from some vendor in the market, deploy them into our container, and thereafter...]]></description>
        

        <pubDate>Wed, 01 Sep 2004 17:13:04 -0400</pubDate>

        

        <jf:creationDate>Wed, 01 Sep 2004 17:13:04 -0400</jf:creationDate>
        <jf:modificationDate>Wed, 01 Sep 2004 17:13:04 -0400</jf:modificationDate>
        <jf:date>Sep 1, 2004</jf:date>
        <jf:author>Raman Raja</jf:author>
        <jf:replyCount>0</jf:replyCount>
    </item>


    <item>

        <title>Object concepts are related to business</title>
        <link>http://www.theserverside.com/discussions/thread.tss?thread_id=28371</link>

        

        
            <description><![CDATA[<blockquote>Do you think &quot;programming by interface&quot; or polymprphism are related <br>to &quot;OO domain model&quot; and &quot;business methods&quot; in some way ? </blockquote>Of course, yes! <br><br>The problem is what does &quot;business...]]></description>
        

        <pubDate>Wed, 01 Sep 2004 16:14:45 -0400</pubDate>

        

        <jf:creationDate>Wed, 01 Sep 2004 16:14:45 -0400</jf:creationDate>
        <jf:modificationDate>Wed, 01 Sep 2004 16:14:45 -0400</jf:modificationDate>
        <jf:date>Sep 1, 2004</jf:date>
        <jf:author>ja vp</jf:author>
        <jf:replyCount>0</jf:replyCount>
    </item>


    <item>

        <title>Coupling seems to be the fundamental issue</title>
        <link>http://www.theserverside.com/discussions/thread.tss?thread_id=28371</link>

        

        
            <description><![CDATA[SOA has not really achieved loose coupling nirvana. What happens, if the service interface changes (because change is the only thing that is constant,) to the clients that are not interested in the new interface? WIth Web Services or DTO (implementations...]]></description>
        

        <pubDate>Wed, 01 Sep 2004 16:09:54 -0400</pubDate>

        

        <jf:creationDate>Wed, 01 Sep 2004 16:09:54 -0400</jf:creationDate>
        <jf:modificationDate>Wed, 01 Sep 2004 16:09:54 -0400</jf:modificationDate>
        <jf:date>Sep 1, 2004</jf:date>
        <jf:author>Abhijit Deb</jf:author>
        <jf:replyCount>2</jf:replyCount>
    </item>


    <item>

        <title>J2EE not for business ?</title>
        <link>http://www.theserverside.com/discussions/thread.tss?thread_id=28371</link>

        

        
            <description><![CDATA[<blockquote>You do not need to care about &quot;business logic&quot;, this is job for  business analyst.</blockquote>This is a kind of thinking that made sure J2EE did not enter into enterprise computing. Peoplesoft, SAP, Oracle Apps, Siebel - none are...]]></description>
        

        <pubDate>Wed, 01 Sep 2004 13:16:00 -0400</pubDate>

        

        <jf:creationDate>Wed, 01 Sep 2004 13:16:00 -0400</jf:creationDate>
        <jf:modificationDate>Wed, 01 Sep 2004 13:16:00 -0400</jf:modificationDate>
        <jf:date>Sep 1, 2004</jf:date>
        <jf:author>Michael Szlapa</jf:author>
        <jf:replyCount>0</jf:replyCount>
    </item>


    <item>

        <title>DTO oxymoron</title>
        <link>http://www.theserverside.com/discussions/thread.tss?thread_id=28371</link>

        

        
            <description><![CDATA[+1 <br>DTO is a just a workaround, nothing to be proud of ... <br><br>I would agree with J2EE impact statement too. I have seen quite a few project where multiple layers play &quot;data ping-pong&quot;. <br>Data goes just back and from through n+1 layers...]]></description>
        

        <pubDate>Wed, 01 Sep 2004 13:01:37 -0400</pubDate>

        

        <jf:creationDate>Wed, 01 Sep 2004 13:01:37 -0400</jf:creationDate>
        <jf:modificationDate>Wed, 01 Sep 2004 13:01:37 -0400</jf:modificationDate>
        <jf:date>Sep 1, 2004</jf:date>
        <jf:author>Michael Szlapa</jf:author>
        <jf:replyCount>0</jf:replyCount>
    </item>


    <item>

        <title>DTO oxymoron</title>
        <link>http://www.theserverside.com/discussions/thread.tss?thread_id=28371</link>

        

        
            <description><![CDATA[<blockquote>Do you think &quot;programming by interface&quot; or polymprphism are related to &quot;OO domain model&quot; and &quot;business methods&quot; in some way ? I prefer to think about things in the way I understand, many things in business I do...]]></description>
        

        <pubDate>Wed, 01 Sep 2004 04:55:13 -0400</pubDate>

        

        <jf:creationDate>Wed, 01 Sep 2004 04:55:13 -0400</jf:creationDate>
        <jf:modificationDate>Wed, 01 Sep 2004 04:55:13 -0400</jf:modificationDate>
        <jf:date>Sep 1, 2004</jf:date>
        <jf:author>Karl Banke</jf:author>
        <jf:replyCount>0</jf:replyCount>
    </item>


    <item>

        <title>DTO is not oxymoron, and I wooul like to see Struct in Java</title>
        <link>http://www.theserverside.com/discussions/thread.tss?thread_id=28371</link>

        

        
            <description><![CDATA[Yeap, DTO makes a lot of sense and CORBA rules.<br>Even with presence of DTO there is room for nasty errors in Java: consider this DTO (or business object )<br>Class MyDTO implements Serializable{<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;List values;<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;String...]]></description>
        

        <pubDate>Tue, 31 Aug 2004 13:27:03 -0400</pubDate>

        

        <jf:creationDate>Tue, 31 Aug 2004 13:27:03 -0400</jf:creationDate>
        <jf:modificationDate>Tue, 31 Aug 2004 13:27:03 -0400</jf:modificationDate>
        <jf:date>Aug 31, 2004</jf:date>
        <jf:author>Konstantin Ignatyev</jf:author>
        <jf:replyCount>0</jf:replyCount>
    </item>


    <item>

        <title>DTO oxymoron</title>
        <link>http://www.theserverside.com/discussions/thread.tss?thread_id=28371</link>

        

        
            <description><![CDATA[<blockquote>I recently found myself dumbfounded when a sr. j2ee developer told me that objects in my j2ee model should not have business methods and that those belonged to the session beans!</blockquote>What he should say is that business objects should...]]></description>
        

        <pubDate>Tue, 31 Aug 2004 12:22:13 -0400</pubDate>

        

        <jf:creationDate>Tue, 31 Aug 2004 12:22:13 -0400</jf:creationDate>
        <jf:modificationDate>Tue, 31 Aug 2004 12:22:13 -0400</jf:modificationDate>
        <jf:date>Aug 31, 2004</jf:date>
        <jf:author>Michael Jouravlev</jf:author>
        <jf:replyCount>0</jf:replyCount>
    </item>


    <item>

        <title>DTO oxymoron</title>
        <link>http://www.theserverside.com/discussions/thread.tss?thread_id=28371</link>

        

        
            <description><![CDATA[<blockquote>I recently found myself dumbfounded when a sr. j2ee developer told me that objects in my j2ee model should not have business methods and that those belonged to the session beans!</blockquote>I'd probably give you the same advice mainly due to...]]></description>
        

        <pubDate>Tue, 31 Aug 2004 11:10:17 -0400</pubDate>

        

        <jf:creationDate>Tue, 31 Aug 2004 11:10:17 -0400</jf:creationDate>
        <jf:modificationDate>Tue, 31 Aug 2004 11:10:17 -0400</jf:modificationDate>
        <jf:date>Aug 31, 2004</jf:date>
        <jf:author>Ian Purton</jf:author>
        <jf:replyCount>1</jf:replyCount>
    </item>


    <item>

        <title>DTO oxymoron</title>
        <link>http://www.theserverside.com/discussions/thread.tss?thread_id=28371</link>

        

        
            <description><![CDATA[<blockquote> If I remember correctly the main push for OO was not because of reuse (it was in the GUI layer), but because it enables a certain way of thinking about things. As it turned out, this is not an easy way to think about things. I still find a...]]></description>
        

        <pubDate>Tue, 31 Aug 2004 08:50:52 -0400</pubDate>

        

        <jf:creationDate>Tue, 31 Aug 2004 08:50:52 -0400</jf:creationDate>
        <jf:modificationDate>Tue, 31 Aug 2004 08:50:52 -0400</jf:modificationDate>
        <jf:date>Aug 31, 2004</jf:date>
        <jf:author>Juozas Baliuka</jf:author>
        <jf:replyCount>2</jf:replyCount>
    </item>


    <item>

        <title>DTO oxymoron</title>
        <link>http://www.theserverside.com/discussions/thread.tss?thread_id=28371</link>

        

        
            <description><![CDATA[<blockquote>I have used and written business objects in the past which had transparent (to the user of the objects) remoting, it's not a valid argument for removing object orientation. The original poster had a fair comment. I have seen the least object...]]></description>
        

        <pubDate>Tue, 31 Aug 2004 08:30:51 -0400</pubDate>

        

        <jf:creationDate>Tue, 31 Aug 2004 08:30:51 -0400</jf:creationDate>
        <jf:modificationDate>Tue, 31 Aug 2004 08:30:51 -0400</jf:modificationDate>
        <jf:date>Aug 31, 2004</jf:date>
        <jf:author>Karl Banke</jf:author>
        <jf:replyCount>3</jf:replyCount>
    </item>



</channel>
</rss>

