|
Home > Archive > microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcsd > November 2002 > asp or java
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
|
|
|
| Di all,
I think building window application with VB.net is popular
However, building web app with Java is better than
asp.net? Since asp.net is only run on win...
| |
|
| "joe" <nil@nomail.com> wrote in message
news:113e01c28b3e$ea239970$39e
f2ecf@TKMSFTNGXA08...
> I think building window application with VB.net is popular
> However, building web app with Java is better than
> asp.net? Since asp.net is only run on win...
I don't think platform portability matters in general. Like Java, the C
language also allows creating a lowest common denominator multiplatform app
from one code base. This is rarely done because the result is almost always
significantly inferior in many ways to an application that takes direct
advantage of the underlying platform.
But I think code portability is especially unimportant for web applications.
You only need it to run one one platform - your web server(s).
I think Java's a reasonable choice for a web app, though VB.Net is a
comparable language now (VB6 was not as good as java imo). If you pick Java,
I think I'd definitely use Sun's or other non-MS tools. I don't think J# has
a very bright future.
| |
| Alan Davis 2002-11-14, 3:23 am |
| >I don't think platform portability matters in general.
It really does mater if your core business is software development and
you want to maximize your customer base.
There are still relatively few big accounts (multi million dollar)
whose IT structure is built around Microsoft services.
>Like Java, the C language also allows creating a lowest common denominator multiplatform app
>from one code base.
>This is rarely done because the result is almost always
>significantly inferior in many ways to an application that takes direct
>advantage of the underlying platform.
No necessarily, take Implementations of Oracle. I'm no Oracle expert,
but I believe functionality is the same on each Implementations. There
are enhancements which are not so hot in the implementation, as in
others, i.e. clustering is not so great in the MS implementation.
>I think Java's a reasonable choice for a web app, though VB.Net is a
>comparable language now (VB6 was not as good as java imo).
If the target audience (or customers) are microsoft based, stick with
microsoft tools.
> If you pick Java, I think I'd definitely use Sun's or other non-MS tools.
With extended support for J++ ending in Sept 2004, and the fact that
J# is not an implementation of Java or even supports many of it's
features, it's the only choice one has.
| |
| Alan Davis 2002-11-14, 3:23 am |
| > Since asp.net is only run on win...
There will be ports to other OS's, but I expect it will get as much
attention as COM got.
| |
| Erno de Weerd 2002-11-14, 5:23 am |
| Microsoft's Shared Source CLI Now Supports Mac OS X
Download the complete implementation of the ECMA CLI and C# standards that
now runs on Mac OS X as well as Windows XP and FreeBSD. (November 11,
Download) More...
http://msdn.microsoft.com/downloads...s/sample.asp?ur
l=/msdn-files/027/002/097/msdncompositedoc.xml
Erno de Weerd
MCSD MCAD MCT
"Alan Davis" <.> wrote in message
news:6op6tughtcb2fj25rs9qd030p
nvsfemgp9@4ax.com...
> > Since asp.net is only run on win...
> There will be ports to other OS's, but I expect it will get as much
> attention as COM got.
| |
|
| "Alan Davis" <.> wrote in message
news:2op6tucubo2cf4d6milq3363l
u5di8gqgc@4ax.com...
> >I don't think platform portability matters in general.
>
> It really does mater if your core business is software development and
> you want to maximize your customer base.
You had just better hope you don't have competitors on each platform who are
using native development tools. You had also better be sure that each
platform you support is worth it, because you certainly can't just 'write to
the spec' and expect exactly the same functionality on each platform. You
have to invest a lot of resources testing on every supported platform and in
most cases customizing the code to work or work well for each platform. Sun
has implied that the portability is 'free', and that's far from reality.
My core business is software development, but our approach to maximizing our
customer base is using the best tools we can for the platform that the
overwhelming majority of our customers use. I think platform portability is
like being a jack of all trades and master of none. Either approach has its
upside, I just think being a master of one is better. There are so few
commercial successes that exploit platform portability that I think it's
more than just my own opinion. The java based Oracle client tools are a good
example of this. On Windows, the SQL Server client tools are far better and
never crash on me.
| |
| Alan Davis 2002-11-14, 10:23 am |
| Should make .005% of computer users happy, he,he!!
I'm still waiting for vb3 to be released on the Mac! In June '94 I was
told beginning of '95, but that was before Microsoft had such a stake
in Apple.
BTW, don't get me wrong Apple's OS should be where windows is today.
On Thu, 14 Nov 2002 11:36:03 +0100, "Erno de Weerd"
<ernow@infosupport.com> wrote:
>Microsoft's Shared Source CLI Now Supports Mac OS X
>Download the complete implementation of the ECMA CLI and C# standards that
>now runs on Mac OS X as well as Windows XP and FreeBSD. (November 11,
>Download) More...
>
>http://msdn.microsoft.com/downloads...s/sample.asp?ur
>l=/msdn-files/027/002/097/msdncompositedoc.xml
>
>Erno de Weerd
>MCSD MCAD MCT
>
>"Alan Davis" <.> wrote in message
> news:6op6tughtcb2fj25rs9qd030p
nvsfemgp9@4ax.com...
>> > Since asp.net is only run on win...
>> There will be ports to other OS's, but I expect it will get as much
>> attention as COM got.
>
| |
| Erno de Weerd 2002-11-14, 10:23 am |
| As far as I'm concerned, the big news actually is that MS releases
sourcecode.
Erno de Weerd
MCSD MCAD MCT
"Alan Davis" <.> wrote in message
news:gng7tu05p9rvjt8tec9fmjj3q
f25drkgs2@4ax.com...
> Should make .005% of computer users happy, he,he!!
>
> I'm still waiting for vb3 to be released on the Mac! In June '94 I was
> told beginning of '95, but that was before Microsoft had such a stake
> in Apple.
>
> BTW, don't get me wrong Apple's OS should be where windows is today.
>
> On Thu, 14 Nov 2002 11:36:03 +0100, "Erno de Weerd"
> <ernow@infosupport.com> wrote:
>
> >Microsoft's Shared Source CLI Now Supports Mac OS X
> >Download the complete implementation of the ECMA CLI and C# standards
that
> >now runs on Mac OS X as well as Windows XP and FreeBSD. (November 11,
> >Download) More...
> >
>
>http://msdn.microsoft.com/downloads...ds/sample.asp?u
r
> >l=/msdn-files/027/002/097/msdncompositedoc.xml
> >
> >Erno de Weerd
> >MCSD MCAD MCT
> >
> >"Alan Davis" <.> wrote in message
> > news:6op6tughtcb2fj25rs9qd030p
nvsfemgp9@4ax.com...
> >> > Since asp.net is only run on win...
> >> There will be ports to other OS's, but I expect it will get as much
> >> attention as COM got.
> >
>
| |
| Alan Davis 2002-11-14, 11:23 am |
| On Thu, 14 Nov 2002 08:28:16 -0700, "Tim" <spammers@begone> wrote:
>"Alan Davis" <.> wrote in message
> news:2op6tucubo2cf4d6milq3363l
u5di8gqgc@4ax.com...
>> >I don't think platform portability matters in general.
>>
>> It really does mater if your core business is software development and
>> you want to maximize your customer base.
>
>You had just better hope you don't have competitors on each platform who are
>using native development tools.
Why?
> You had also better be sure that each
>platform you support is worth it,
Naturally, who on earth would waste resources on something that will
not make money (apart from Governments and local authorities!)?
> because you certainly can't just 'write to
>the spec' and expect exactly the same functionality on each platform.
Yes you can. The requirements of your product do not change. The
purpose of the product is to solve problems for which there is a
market place, i.e. can be sold with the prospect of making money.
>You have to invest a lot of resources testing on every supported platform and in
>most cases customizing the code to work or work well for each platform. Sun
>has implied that the portability is 'free', and that's far from reality.
>
Never implied that it was free. These day's you cannot believe what
any company says, wheather it be Sun, Microsoft or the MS 'gold'
Partner down the road.
As I said in another post in this thread, Java has made it easier to
port certain systems than what it would be to port systems primarily
written in C, never mind VB.
>My core business is software development, but our approach to maximizing our
>customer base is using the best tools we can for the platform that the
>overwhelming majority of our customers use.
That's good, and I'm sure your company has a niche market. If not your
company will be competing more and more other companies offering the
standard range of products, services or 'bodys'. As the customer base
contracts, so more software houses and 'body shops' will go under.
>I think platform portability is
>like being a jack of all trades and master of none. Either approach has its
>upside, I just think being a master of one is better.
>
Many large companies have there data process being performed on a
range of non-microsft systems. If a large contract comes up which
involves using that data within a microsoft environment (say as a
result of a merger), the contract with go to the supplier who has the
most to other, obvious really.
Look at all those 'body shops' in India and the like of. Prepared to
support or convert than old VB, Cobol or C code for a tenth of the
cost in the west. They have expertise across multiple platforms, and
despite what anyone thinks, there not cowboys either.
> I just think being a master of one is better. There are so few
>commercial successes that exploit platform portability that I think it's
>more than just my own opinion.
During the IT recession of the early 90's many software house & 'body
shops' went under. Those who made it through did so either because
could either adapt or had a product base or expertise across a broad
front.
>There are so few commercial successes that exploit platform portability that I think it's
>more than just my own opinion.
I think there are quite a few, wheather that be those who produce big
products like sap or small products like those who produce device
drivers.
>The java based Oracle client tools are a good
>example of this. On Windows, the SQL Server client tools are far better and
>never crash on me.
They're utter crap are they not? Never understood why they don't make
them as good as those running on other platforms. Maybe they don't see
a market place' for it?
| |
| Hayato Iriumi 2002-11-16, 2:23 am |
| Check this out. It's interesting.
http://www.go-mono.com/
"Alan Davis" <.> wrote in message
news:6op6tughtcb2fj25rs9qd030p
nvsfemgp9@4ax.com...
> > Since asp.net is only run on win...
> There will be ports to other OS's, but I expect it will get as much
> attention as COM got.
| |
| Alan Davis 2002-11-16, 3:23 am |
| I'm well aware of those dot net projects. My point is whether or not
businesses who use those operating systems actually decide to use
those type of tools.
Companies (represented by their IT including the managers & software
engineers) that use those operating systems tend to be anti-microsoft
and would be very obstructive to such changes.
It would be good for businesses if such projects *really* do get a
good response, but personally I don't care one way or another.
|
|
|
|
|