If .net and j2ee are so great...

[Chad Myers]

Re: If .net and j2ee are so great...


"xx" <xxx@yyy.zzz> wrote in message news:3F44EA92.2 030602@yyy.zzz. ..[color=blue]
>
>
> Tor Iver Wilhelmsen wrote:[color=green]
> > mlw <mlw@nospam.n o> writes:
> >
> >[color=darkred]
> >>Or perhaps you don't know what you think you know. Byte codes are[/color][/color][/color]
not[color=blue][color=green][color=darkred]
> >>machine codes, they are interpreted or "JIT" compiled at runtime,[/color][/color][/color]
either[color=blue][color=green][color=darkred]
> >>way, a Java or .NET program is not in machine form.[/color]
> >
> >
> > The byte codes, whether targeting the CLR or JVM, are turned into
> > native code fractions of a second after the classes load - from that
> > point on,it's just as native as a "precompile d to native" C app.[/color]
>
> Yes, "from that point on" is a common thing to say, but not very true.
> Every time you run the program you have to re-interpret it into[/color]
machine[color=blue]
> code. It is an interpreted program, it matters not how it is[/color]
interpreted.

Actually, .NET compilations are usually cached, so they're not
compiled every time, just the once.

..NET is interpreted in the same way that C++ is interpreted into
machine code :)
[color=blue]
> If you update your JVM or CLR, it may "interpret" your byte codes
> differently. Where as my binary application will execute the same
> instructions until there is a new version. A very important[/color]
distinction.

Really? So all those DLLs you call will never change? You have
external dependencies on the system and the runtime environment.
It just happens that .NET compile code's runtime environment
is more compact and consistent across platforms.

-c

[Chad Myers]

Re: If .net and j2ee are so great...


"Tom Shelton" <tom@mtogden.co m> wrote in message
news:h481b.42$O K2.42064@news.u swest.net...[color=blue]
> Simon Cooke wrote:
>[color=green]
> > On Thu, 21 Aug 2003 01:17:54 -0500, Chad Myers wrote:
> >
> >[color=darkred]
> >>"Roedy Green" <roedy@mindprod .com> wrote in message
> >>news:hmm8kvsk iv8u7207cep18v7 scfuj0hgois@4ax .com...
> >>
> >>>On Thu, 21 Aug 2003 05:22:49 GMT, 43 <jabailo@earthl ink.net> wrote[/color][/color][/color]
or[color=blue][color=green][color=darkred]
> >>>quoted :
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>how come m$Office isn't written in .net?
> >>>>
> >>>>how come Open Office isn't written in j2ee?
> >>>
> >>>Because these are both server side technologies. Editing a[/color][/color][/color]
document[color=blue][color=green][color=darkred]
> >>>is a solitary activity. It works best with instantaneous response[/color][/color][/color]
to[color=blue][color=green][color=darkred]
> >>>each keystroke.
> >>
> >>Actually,ther e is a good chunk of Office 2003 in .NET and it will
> >>be moving to completely .NET switfly like most if not all MS[/color][/color][/color]
products.[color=blue][color=green][color=darkred]
> >>
> >>Windows 2003 Server depends heavily on the .NET Framework (whack[/color][/color][/color]
your[color=blue][color=green][color=darkred]
> >>c:\windows\as sembly folder in Safe Mode and reboot and check the
> >>Event Viewer).
> >>
> >>I recall hearing a statistic that in Longhorn, large chunks of the
> >>Win32 API are being moved to managed code. The API will go from
> >>something
> >>like 5x,xxx functions to 8,xxx functions with the difference[/color][/color][/color]
existing[color=blue][color=green][color=darkred]
> >>in new OO .NET assemblies.[/color]
> >
> >
> > ... at which point, if the Win32(64) API is not longer native, and[/color][/color]
they've[color=blue][color=green]
> > not fixed their obvious and blatant performance issues with .NET[/color][/color]
startup[color=blue][color=green]
> > (plus the fact that the GC is nondeterministi c and can get in the[/color][/color]
way of UI[color=blue][color=green]
> > handling), I'll switch to programming Linux.[/color][/color]

(I'm replying through Tom, I hope you don't mind)

First, the startup time is fixed in Win2K3 because the the first
time the CLR starts up in the OS, there are several initialization
things that must occur system-wide. Since Win2K3 relies so heavily
on the .NET framework, the CLR is initialized during OS startup.

Longhorn will have the same effect.

As far as the GC, I don't think you understand what non-deterministic
means in this context. It's related to memory management, not
the order in which events occur and such. GC has no effect on
UI development. Have you (Simon) even used .NET for anything? I
doubt it.

[color=blue]
> The native interfaces aren't going away, nor the API. Chad seems to[/color]
be[color=blue]
> a little confused here.[/color]

http://www.develop4.net/news.html

"First, the software giant aims to slash the number of API calls in
the Win32 API set from more than 70,000 to fewer than 10,000 to help
developers better exploit the next-generation Windows shell, user
interface (code-named Aero) and .Net framework components in Longhorn,
according to sources familiar with the Longhorn plans.

"Win32 has like 76,000 APIs, and they're taking it down to 8,000 with
Longhorn technology," said one source familiar with the plans.

"Microsoft is expected to release additional details about Longhorn
at the Windows Hardware Engineering (WinHEC) trade show here this
week."

I'm not confused, it's a fact. Some of those APIs will just disappear,
some of them will be manifest in new .NET APIs.

-c

[Chad Myers]

Re: If .net and j2ee are so great...


"GreyCloud" <cumulus@mist.c om> wrote in message
news:3F45A153.A 29DD2B0@mist.co m...[color=blue]
> Simon Cooke wrote:[/color]

<snip>
[color=blue][color=green]
> > I stopped programming in Java because I couldn't stand the amount of[/color][/color]
memory[color=blue][color=green]
> > it was taking up to run simple apps, or the perf hit. It's the same[/color][/color]
reason[color=blue][color=green]
> > I won't use C#.
> >
> > That, and the lack of templates.
> >[/color]
>
> Same here... I didn't really like the anonymous handler
> style... to me it was rather cumbersome and vague at first
> glance.[/color]

Uh oh, anonymous methods are coming to C#. I personally
disagree with the reasons why seeing their abuse in Java,
but whatever.

I'm still not sure about partial types either, it seems
like it'll just lead to confusion and abuse as well,
with very little benefit

-c

[Tom Shelton]

Re: If .net and j2ee are so great...

Chad Myers wrote:[color=blue]
> "Tom Shelton" <tom@mtogden.co m> wrote in message
> news:h481b.42$O K2.42064@news.u swest.net...
>[color=green]
>>Simon Cooke wrote:
>>
>>[color=darkred]
>>>On Thu, 21 Aug 2003 01:17:54 -0500, Chad Myers wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>"Roedy Green" <roedy@mindprod .com> wrote in message
>>>>news:hmm8kv skiv8u7207cep18 v7scfuj0hgois@4 ax.com...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>On Thu, 21 Aug 2003 05:22:49 GMT, 43 <jabailo@earthl ink.net> wrote[/color][/color]
>
> or
>[color=green][color=darkred]
>>>>>quoted :
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>how come m$Office isn't written in .net?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>how come Open Office isn't written in j2ee?
>>>>>
>>>>>Because these are both server side technologies. Editing a[/color][/color]
>
> document
>[color=green][color=darkred]
>>>>>is a solitary activity. It works best with instantaneous response[/color][/color]
>
> to
>[color=green][color=darkred]
>>>>>each keystroke.
>>>>
>>>>Actually,th ere is a good chunk of Office 2003 in .NET and it will
>>>>be moving to completely .NET switfly like most if not all MS[/color][/color]
>
> products.
>[color=green][color=darkred]
>>>>Windows 2003 Server depends heavily on the .NET Framework (whack[/color][/color]
>
> your
>[color=green][color=darkred]
>>>>c:\windows\ assembly folder in Safe Mode and reboot and check the
>>>>Event Viewer).
>>>>
>>>>I recall hearing a statistic that in Longhorn, large chunks of the
>>>>Win32 API are being moved to managed code. The API will go from
>>>>something
>>>>like 5x,xxx functions to 8,xxx functions with the difference[/color][/color]
>
> existing
>[color=green][color=darkred]
>>>>in new OO .NET assemblies.
>>>
>>>
>>>... at which point, if the Win32(64) API is not longer native, and[/color][/color]
>
> they've
>[color=green][color=darkred]
>>>not fixed their obvious and blatant performance issues with .NET[/color][/color]
>
> startup
>[color=green][color=darkred]
>>>(plus the fact that the GC is nondeterministi c and can get in the[/color][/color]
>
> way of UI
>[color=green][color=darkred]
>>>handling), I'll switch to programming Linux.[/color][/color]
>
>
> (I'm replying through Tom, I hope you don't mind)
>
> First, the startup time is fixed in Win2K3 because the the first
> time the CLR starts up in the OS, there are several initialization
> things that must occur system-wide. Since Win2K3 relies so heavily
> on the .NET framework, the CLR is initialized during OS startup.
>
> Longhorn will have the same effect.
>
> As far as the GC, I don't think you understand what non-deterministic
> means in this context. It's related to memory management, not
> the order in which events occur and such. GC has no effect on
> UI development. Have you (Simon) even used .NET for anything? I
> doubt it.
>
>
>[color=green]
>>The native interfaces aren't going away, nor the API. Chad seems to[/color]
>
> be
>[color=green]
>>a little confused here.[/color]
>
>
> http://www.develop4.net/news.html
>
> "First, the software giant aims to slash the number of API calls in
> the Win32 API set from more than 70,000 to fewer than 10,000 to help
> developers better exploit the next-generation Windows shell, user
> interface (code-named Aero) and .Net framework components in Longhorn,
> according to sources familiar with the Longhorn plans.
>
> "Win32 has like 76,000 APIs, and they're taking it down to 8,000 with
> Longhorn technology," said one source familiar with the plans.
>
> "Microsoft is expected to release additional details about Longhorn
> at the Windows Hardware Engineering (WinHEC) trade show here this
> week."
>
> I'm not confused, it's a fact. Some of those APIs will just disappear,
> some of them will be manifest in new .NET APIs.
>
> -c[/color]

I'm looking at the article now. Thanks. I hadn't seen this before. I
was under the impression that they were simply wrapping the native
interface more completly. By the way, isn't Longhorn going to be a
64-bit OS?

Tom Shelton

[Jeff Relf]

- Complex.CPP Vs. Simple.NET -

Hi 43 , you say :
" How come Linux and all Linux applications
are written in c/c++ ? "


Scripts are for quick and dirty jobs . Simple Jobs .

C++ is for Large serious jobs . Complex Jobs .

[Roedy Green]

Re: If .net and j2ee are so great...

On Fri, 22 Aug 2003 00:05:47 -0500, "Chad Myers"
<cmyers@N0.SP.A M.austin.rr.com > wrote or quoted :
[color=blue]
>Uh oh, anonymous methods are coming to C#. I personally
>disagree with the reasons why seeing their abuse in Java,
>but whatever.[/color]

there are no anonymous methods in Java. There are anonymous inner
classes however. Are you sure you feel qualified to judge something
you so obviously have never used?

--
Canadian Mind Products, Roedy Green.
Coaching, problem solving, economical contract programming.
See http://mindprod.com/jgloss/jgloss.html for The Java Glossary.

[Jeff Relf]

- Walkie Talkies -

Oops , I said :
" P2P devices , like the Blueberry ... "

The Blueberry requires a network hierarchy .

A CB is more like P2P ... and even that requires a license .

Are walkie talkies the main P2P devices today ?

[43]

n=2

Jeff Relf:
[color=blue]
> Oops , I said :
> " P2P devices , like the Blueberry ... "
>
> The Blueberry requires a network hierarchy .
>
> A CB is more like P2P ... and even that requires a license .
>
> Are walkie talkies the main P2P devices today ?[/color]

walkie talkies are a P2P network where n=2.

if you're walkie talkie could allow other walkie talkies
to 'island hop' their signal on part of your
system, then n would be higher.

[Jon Skeet]

Re: If .net and j2ee are so great...

Chad Myers <cmyers@N0.SP.A M.austin.rr.com > wrote:[color=blue]
> Uh oh, anonymous methods are coming to C#. I personally
> disagree with the reasons why seeing their abuse in Java,
> but whatever.[/color]

Anonymous *classes* in Java are indeed a pain (IMO) - but I think
anonymous delegates will be somewhat better. There's less scope for
abuse, I believe. We'll see though :)
[color=blue]
> I'm still not sure about partial types either, it seems
> like it'll just lead to confusion and abuse as well,
> with very little benefit[/color]

I don't know - I think there's clear benefit in the situation where
some code is machine generated and some isn't. That's the *only* time I
would use them though.

--
Jon Skeet - <skeet@pobox.co m>

http://www.pobox.com/~skeet/

If replying to the group, please do not mail me too

[Tim Tyler]

Re: If .net and j2ee are so great...

In comp.lang.java. advocacy Chad Myers <cmyers@n0.sp.a m.austin.rr.com > wrote:

: It just happens that .NET compile code's runtime environment
: is more compact and consistent across platforms.

It more consistently doesn't exist if that's what you mean:

Platform .NET
Windows Y
Linux N
Solaris N
FreeBSD N
Mac OS N

"More compact" than what? It's a /lot/ bigger than the JRE.
--
__________
|im |yler http://timtyler.org/ tim@tt1.org

[asj]

mlw, perhaps you should tell this to all those large J2EE users? (Re: If .net and j2ee are so great...)

mlw <mlw@nospam.n o> wrote in message news:<5g11b.216 055$uu5.40024@s ccrnsc04>...[color=blue]
> 43 wrote:
> Hey, Java and .NET, like VisualBasic and COBOL, are high level languages
> intended for inexperienced developers or business applications. As such,
> they are fine for things like LimeWire, Instant Message clients, and
> perhaps some business logic stuff.[/color]

"perhaps some business logic stuff"?

perhaps you should tell this to eBay, which dumped microsoft and will
be running all of its transactions using J2EE. right now, it handles
more than 400 million transactions a day, but the thing is architected
to handle up to a billion dynamic page views a day by 2004.

or perhaps you should tell this to the thousands of large enterprises
that run IBM Websphere, BEA Weblogic, SunONE, Oracle 9i, etc.

BEA WEblogic's J2EE app server is used in 30,000 customers worldwide,
while IBM's J2EE app server Websphere provides service to:

65% of the Fortune 500 companies
80% of the top US healthcare companies
75% of commercial banks worldwide
90% of the top commercial banks in the US
67% of the world's largest banks use IBM messaging servers
15 of the top Wall Street brokerage firms
7 of the 8 largest US telecommunicati ons companies

yeah, "simple apps" indeed.

[xx]

Re: mlw, perhaps you should tell this to all those large J2EE users?



asj wrote:[color=blue]
> mlw <mlw@nospam.n o> wrote in message news:<5g11b.216 055$uu5.40024@s ccrnsc04>...
>[color=green]
>>43 wrote:
>>Hey, Java and .NET, like VisualBasic and COBOL, are high level languages
>>intended for inexperienced developers or business applications. As such,
>>they are fine for things like LimeWire, Instant Message clients, and
>>perhaps some business logic stuff.[/color]
>
>
> "perhaps some business logic stuff"?
>
> perhaps you should tell this to eBay, which dumped microsoft and will
> be running all of its transactions using J2EE. right now, it handles
> more than 400 million transactions a day, but the thing is architected
> to handle up to a billion dynamic page views a day by 2004.
>
> or perhaps you should tell this to the thousands of large enterprises
> that run IBM Websphere, BEA Weblogic, SunONE, Oracle 9i, etc.
>
> BEA WEblogic's J2EE app server is used in 30,000 customers worldwide,
> while IBM's J2EE app server Websphere provides service to:
>
> 65% of the Fortune 500 companies
> 80% of the top US healthcare companies
> 75% of commercial banks worldwide
> 90% of the top commercial banks in the US
> 67% of the world's largest banks use IBM messaging servers
> 15 of the top Wall Street brokerage firms
> 7 of the 8 largest US telecommunicati ons companies
>
> yeah, "simple apps" indeed.[/color]

Actually, web applications and business logic applications are *very*
simple indeed. It is the infrastructure behind the J2EE environments is
very heavy duty and complex. Clustered SQL databases (obviously not
written in Java), caching systems, and so on.

The front end, load balanced, redundent, J2EE environments doing the
business logic are very simple. Have you never seen and enterprise system?

Now, what was your point?

[xx]

Re: mlw, perhaps you should tell this to all those large J2EE users?



asj wrote:[color=blue]
> mlw <mlw@nospam.n o> wrote in message news:<5g11b.216 055$uu5.40024@s ccrnsc04>...
>[color=green]
>>43 wrote:
>>Hey, Java and .NET, like VisualBasic and COBOL, are high level languages
>>intended for inexperienced developers or business applications. As such,
>>they are fine for things like LimeWire, Instant Message clients, and
>>perhaps some business logic stuff.[/color]
>
>
> "perhaps some business logic stuff"?
>
> perhaps you should tell this to eBay, which dumped microsoft and will
> be running all of its transactions using J2EE. right now, it handles
> more than 400 million transactions a day, but the thing is architected
> to handle up to a billion dynamic page views a day by 2004.[/color]

The Mohawk Software "Msession" manager for PHP can handle a regularly
distributed "400 million" page/session operations in a day on one 800MHZ
dual PIII Linux box.

This comes to a little more that 4600 pages views a second. The msession
daemon can handle over 5000 in the afore mention configuration. And, no,
it is not written in Java. It is written in C++.

[Jeff Relf]

- John is Dreaming Again -

Hi 101011 , You say :
" Walkie talkies are a P2P network where n = 2 .
If your walkie talkie could allow other walkie talkies
to ' island hop ' their signal
on part of your system , then n would be higher . "

I can't think of a P2P network that
doesn't fall under some hierarchy .

Even Napster was under
the hierarchy of the internet and the government .

Are you dreaming again John ?

[xx]

Re: - Complex.CPP Vs. Simple.NET -



Jeff Relf wrote:[color=blue]
> Hi 43 , you say :
> " How come Linux and all Linux applications
> are written in c/c++ ? "
>
>
> Scripts are for quick and dirty jobs . Simple Jobs .
>
> C++ is for Large serious jobs . Complex Jobs .[/color]

And Java is for?