Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Programming IT Technology

Getting the Java Religion 63

Posted by Hemos from the losing-my-religion dept.
Anonymous Coward writes "Interesting article at angryCoder about java,c# and the entire .com "hype". Take a historical approach to the entire thing and brings up the following points: no business is truly altruistic, and one needs to learn from history or else."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Getting the Java Religion More

Getting the Java Religion

Comments Filter:

  • So, what was that about Java? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Violet Null ( 452694 ) on Monday January 07, 2002 @04:44PM (#2800236)
    I mean, really. This isn't flamebait. I read the article, and the only thing about Java (or, more precisely, Java coders) that I found in it was that, man, Java coders are religious about their language (which could be said about any language), and Java runs slowly (which is true, but not a new observation).

    The rest was all quite rambling about different OSes for no particular reason that I could discern.
    • Java runs slowly (which is true, but not a new observation).

      It's not even that true any more, certainly within 50% of C++ in most cases. What is true is that it doesn't allow any 'low down' control, and that it bloats out a treat. But, it is generally believed here (NZ) and quite possibly the rest of the world that Java is the near term future of internal applications (which accounts for perhaps 95% of software development) but certainly not systems programming (which accounts for perhaps 95% of CPU cycles executed).

      Dave
      • systems programming (which accounts for perhaps 95% of CPU cycles executed)
        This may not have much to do with the discussion, but, assuming that by systems programming you mean OS code, you are here implying that 95% of the CPU cycles are consumed by the OS. This would be considered a TERRIBLE ammount of overhead, even for a redmond-based OS designer.

    • Re:So, what was that about Java? (Score:1, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Not all "coders" are religious about languages.

      Many developers work with several languages, and recognize that each have different strengths.

      I myself am a Delphi and C++ guy.

    • Re:So, what was that about Java? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Twylite ( 234238 ) <twylite&crypt,co,za> on Tuesday January 08, 2002 @10:47AM (#2803691) Homepage

      Religious? No. Obsessive? Often. And with good reason; I'll let you in on a few.

      Your average Java programmer is not a happy-go-lucky hacker. He works for a living, and wants a language that supports his development.

      With Java he gets:

      1. An extensive, well documented class library. This more than anything, more than syntax, more than platform neutrality, more than speed, more than any underlying technological benefit of any other language, more than you want a blowjob tonight, is what a serious wage coder wants from a language.
      2. Garbage collection, for added stability and not being anal retentive about freeing memory. Also easier to use than smart pointers.
      3. A pure-OO framework that allows designers to design stuff so that coders can't screw blissfully with each others minds, because there are no "back-doors" and the protection is run-time.
      4. No operator overloading or line noise syntax, so when you come to maintain the code done by the vac. student (guru hacker from outer space) you have a clue what it means.

      I like Java for all these reasons. I also like C++, for its power and the extra 5% performance I can squeeze out of it if I need to, and because I'm anal enough to do it right. But I've worked with more than a dozen people who weren't, so it became my problem to fix their mistakes.

      One final thing. Using an Apache-style architecture, a Java server can happily achieve 90% of C++ performance on most client-server applications. And I've worked on two projects that prove it.

    • I was around in 1995 doing Java development and I have to say that this article is, indeed, flamebait.
  • Loved it, Microsoft astroturfers ramping it up once again. "Developers! Developers! Developers!"

    Dave

    • "Developers! Developers! Developers!"

      God, stop saying that! It gives me bad dreams of Ballmer as Kong demanding his next course in an endless banquet.

  • brings up the following points: no business is truly altruistic, and one needs to learn from history or else.

    And yet they omit to mention that somethimes it gets cold in Canada in the winter?

  • No wonder (Score:3, Funny)

    by pma ( 43637 ) on Monday January 07, 2002 @05:17PM (#2800459)
    "The 1st eZine build with ASP.NET" - No wonder it's called Angry Coder.

  • Got me thinking... (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    One of the points this article makes that I agree with is that Unix is a platform of non-innovation. *nix started off as a server platform for geeks and thanks to RedHat, SUSE and the gang, are trying to work its way into the desktops of the public. How? By copying, porting or emulating anything that M$, Apple or the other innovative leaders do on the platform of choice - Windows. Sure, we have Larry Wall creating a wet-dream of a language (Perl) and keeping it fun & interesting. Sure, we have Alan Cox, Linus Torvalds and the gang keeping the Linux kernel relevant and worthwhile. But we need more! We need application innovators! We need desktop innovators! We need format innovators! We need a reason for the public to use *nix! That won't happen as long as I can't watch my .mov files (easily) or have a seamless experience with copy & paste, URL's, being able to print, etc.


    Bottom-line: We need to innovate better for the Linux platform.

    • Re:Got me thinking... (Score:1, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      That won't happen as long as I can't watch my .mov files (easily) or have a seamless experience with copy & paste, URL's, being able to print, etc.

      First you have a lengthy rant about how Linux needs "innovation", then you say what it needs is to clone a bunch of features from Apple and Microsoft.

      Bottom-line: You're babbling.

    • We need application innovators!

      Why would anybody who came up with an innovative application release it only for Linux? Linux is always going to be playing catch up, it doesn't have the monster market share and so things are going to be developed for Windows first.

      There are innovative window managers out there, but they just aren't as common because most people using Linux previously used Windows and are comfortable pressing alt-f4 to close an application, even though there is nothing intuitive about it.

      That won't happen as long as I can't watch my .mov files (easily) or have a seamless experience with copy & paste, URL's, being able to print, etc.

      Every one of those points I wholeheartedly agree with! Just yesterday I tried printing an email from Kmail. For reasons completely unclear to me, Kmail sent 8 1/2 x 11 formatted data to the printer. The result of course was that the printer has gutter space on every side of the paper so it didn't print those regions and the printout was unreadable. I opened the same mail in Eudora on windows and got a perfectly formatted print (was darker and therefore more readable too).

      • "Why would anybody who came up with an innovative application release it only for Linux? Linux is
        always going to be playing catch up, it doesn't have the monster market share and so things are going to be developed for Windows first. "

        I think you making a fundamental mistake here. Clearly people do produce applications for linux, or indeed other unix platforms. There are plenty of them around after all.

        The mistake is that you are assuming that all application developers are aiming at a wide market. Whilst it may be true that M$ want everyone to use word, its untrue of 99% of applications which are developed. Most applications are written for a small market base, for people with very specific requirements.

        So for instance if I was writing music software I would probably write for the Mac, because thats what most musicians use. Myself I'm a bioinformatician, and most of use some form of Unix. Hence linux is my main platform both for development, and my main target platform. There is nothing particularly religious about this. Unix is a better platform for our needs, and linux is useful because the hardware is dirty cheap.

        What the article is talking about is not actually innovating applications, he is talking about high volume, "killer applications". More or less by definition by the time something turns into a high volume killer app, it will have lost most of its innovation, and will be using something that has gone before.

        Phil

  • Good, ole fashioned, F U D (Score:5, Insightful)

    by gnovos ( 447128 ) <gnovos@ c h i p p e d . net> on Monday January 07, 2002 @06:21PM (#2800912) Homepage Journal
    This is FUD, albiet subtle FUD. Passages like "Whilst Windows has become a component-based rapidly-developing operating system, despite the open-source pretensions of mass part-time development, there is nothing revolutionary appearing (or likely to) on the same Unix platform it always was. Hopefully it will manage to survive in the niche's where Unix has been over the last many years." give away the writer's true intentions. If you want to make a point about something, you don't just come out and say it point blank, like "Linux is crap! Bppppt!", instead you take the subtle route and try and make your readers think that they came to that conclusion all by themselves, as this article seems to be doing.

    When you say "Hopefully Linux will manage to survive" what you are really saying subconciously is "Linux may not survive, so don't use it". also by adding another, better choice in the same passage ("Windows has become a component-based rapidly-developing operating system"), you allow the reader to think he has discovered for himself something that the author has blindly missed. It makes the reader think he's "figured out" that Windows is superior. When you "figure out" something like this, it is far more credible (since it is coming from your own head) than when somone just jumps out and trys to push something in your face.

    The propaganda battle (often called Marketing, btw) that's been going on recently would make a Nazi blush...
    • In angryCoder tradition, this article is serious flame-bait and attempts to address some of the pretensions within the Java and general developer community.
      Nice editorial work, Hemos. As if there aren't enough flame-baits in /. commentary already.
    • all I had to do to come to the same conclusion is notice the five (5) .NET & one (1) c# adverts in the sidebars to figure out who "wrote" this "commentary"

  • article=waste of time (Score:3, Insightful)

    by tongue ( 30814 ) on Monday January 07, 2002 @06:36PM (#2801035) Homepage
    This article has nothing real to say, except apparently that java coders all like to jump on bandwagons for an over-hyped technology, and that we should all instead hop on a microsoft bandwagon for an overhyped technology. I really fail to see what the difference between an overhyped java platform and an overhyped ".Not" platform is.
  • OK, not really. But, like everybody else in the news media, associates linux and open source with the dot-com era (even though they have been around far longer). I have never seen anyone before associating java with the dot-com era. But it's associated again here, I guess hoping for death by association.

    He also says good things about visual basic. Visual basic is a crappy language. Or, at least, everybody thinks that. So, of the 10 or 20 competent programmers I have met in my life, only one of them would even consider programming in Visual Basic (and I'm sure he'll drop it once he learns java or C++).

    • Hey... don't knock VB

      I used VB once - its great for quickly prototyping crap applications.

      But then I found C and C++ Building and was happy
    • Dropping VB for C++? Your kidding! Instead of wirting 3000 lines of application code, you'll deliberatly choose to addt 1700 lines for ctors, dtors and memory management? No thanks! If your task ist to implement high-performance libraries I admit that you might gain something (although I would prefer to go with strict ANSI-C for tasks like this) Dropping it in favour for Java? Well, I dropped C++ for Java...
  • I found it very boring. Just like this post :).

    Too many words for very little point and new info.
  • In a 5 year period we get one superb programming language - only we can't control when the 5 year period will begin. --Alan J. Perlis

    I don't think we are anywhere close to one of thouse 5 year periods.

  • Incoherent rambling (Score:4, Insightful)

    by smoon ( 16873 ) on Tuesday January 08, 2002 @12:15PM (#2804117) Homepage
    Where in the h*ll is this guy coming from?

    Has he ever had to _support_ a big MS server installation?

    Sure, the "Mainframe is dead", except for the tens of thousands of businesses that rely on fast, efficient, reliable, and comparatively cheap processing provided by mainframes and the relatively inexpensive cobol programmers that man them.

    Sure, Unix is a 'niche market', except for the millions of users who use it every day for tasks ranging from mainframe replacement to destop applications, not to mention the countless academic, engineering, and other uses Unix is put to. For example, running most of the infrastructure on the Internet.

    Yeah, Java runs slow. Boo hoo. So does a windows machine, even when you ignore downtime due to reboots and system crashes.

    When this bozo is ready to bet his business on a technology, and is ready to assume full responsibility for the consequences of his decision, and is able to execute on his strategy, then and only then is he qualified to write a credible version of the article referenced.
    • oh dear - why must we argue about such trival things. I mean it's like engineers fighting over which hammer to use :)

      I would love to see a solution to programming lang's and operating systems that meant we could all get on with doing the more interesting problems - but we need the open community and the microsofts, as long as there is more than one, then we should all be happy.

      and who cares if jave or c# or vb is slow, its a great excuse to write better algo's or even buy a better/cooler machine :)
  • Based on very little, these individuals crusade as to how this new way revolutionizes everything that came before.

    This is the funniest line in the piece. Java has been released for how long now? .NET has been released for how long now?
    Oh thats right, it hasn't.
  • Let's see..
    "Although J2EE is designed specifically to run on any platform, given the nature of running under a VM, realistically Unix (or Linux) became the main target. "
    Huh? after whining about VB not getting respect for running under a VM?
    "alternative means of producing software for the software-starved and innovation stagnant Unix platforms. "
    Nice. No need to comment.
    "So Java is a new revolutionary language? Errrm, well, NO! Those with a C/C++/BCPL or whatever background find it all VERY familiar"
    Totally missing the point that the familiarity is intentional, and the libraries and runtime are key elements in Java's usability and widespread adoption. Focus only on the language and those things go away.
    "Many of the Nintendo-playing, JVM-weaned Java-kiddies passionately shout about the evil Microsoft empire, joined by the die-hard Unix guys who are still bitter about the mass-market juggernaut of the Microsoft technologies. "
    Nice derisive stuff, illustrating the formidable bias of the author. Note the subtle smear along the lines of "java is a toy language". Reminds me of 1996!
    "So many of us are very excited about the .Net. This is probably the next big crusade"
    Again, no comment needed.
    Typical stuff. Microsoft has an army of resellers and service vendors who will spew this stuff as long as anyone will listen.
  • A perfect method of truly making my currently Virus free UNIX systems totally VIRUS COMPATIBLE with Microsoft applications!!!

    SIGN ME UP NOW. I WANT A .Net development kit!!!

    Go MONO!!!

    Yahoo!!!

    -hack
  • The Java and Linux crusade is getting some support from IBM, but let's be realistic and understand they just want to shift some more very expensive boxes - they will drop Java/Linux in a heartbeat depending on what makes money.

    Thats odd... I'm sure I've seen IBM pour a large amount of money in to porting linux over to its 390 range servers and its infamous "Love, Peace and Pengiun" adverts that they got in trouble for when they spray painted them on side walks.

    IBM also seem to be pushing java a fair amount also, I have got a heap of IBM/Java demo crap at home from shows
  • There are tons of technolgies popping out these days and in the golden era of dot-coms it was even wilder. Every techology claimed to be the silver bullet for this or that problem. Looking at it seriously we have to admit that - Windows rules the desktop - That old-fashioned software and hardware concepts rule the server. Why is it going this way? Quite easy, the bulk of the software and hardware ist crafted by professionals. None of them is eager to throw away his/her acumulated knowledge and take the risk of starting something completly new where nobody can make any perdictions about the outcome. Professionals use existing technolgies and develop them further. The advent of the java language ist no contradiction. Java is a simplified C++, i.e. a C++ the is more usable. If you take a look at the development of client-apps, you'll discover that Java and VisualBasic are both considered to be powerfuil platforms. Thes didn't made it through the evaluations of big companies because of their avangardistic concepts, but because of their user (programmer)-friendlyness. A professional chooses a tool because it is appropiate to the problem not because it is geekish or nicely structured. How would you explain the success of the PERL otherwise?

Slashdot Top Deals

To do nothing is to be nothing.

Close