Comments on: The need for a common Java stack http://almaer.com/blog/the-need-for-a-common-java-stack blogging about life, the universe, and everything tech Sat, 08 Sep 2012 07:06:53 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: miranda http://almaer.com/blog/the-need-for-a-common-java-stack/comment-page-1#comment-38723 miranda Mon, 02 Jun 2008 17:13:37 +0000 http://almaer.com/blog2/the-need-for-a-common-java-stack#comment-38723 very good <a href="http://swik.net/buy-xanax/" rel="nofollow"><b>buy xanax</b></a> very good
buy xanax

]]> By: cial http://almaer.com/blog/the-need-for-a-common-java-stack/comment-page-1#comment-25496 cial Sat, 22 Sep 2007 22:31:04 +0000 http://almaer.com/blog2/the-need-for-a-common-java-stack#comment-25496 Hi fosamax Hi fosamax

]]> By: swinger http://almaer.com/blog/the-need-for-a-common-java-stack/comment-page-1#comment-25495 swinger Sat, 07 Apr 2007 16:58:17 +0000 http://almaer.com/blog2/the-need-for-a-common-java-stack#comment-25495 Oh and by the way nice site ! Oh and by the way nice site !

]]> By: swinger http://almaer.com/blog/the-need-for-a-common-java-stack/comment-page-1#comment-25494 swinger Sat, 07 Apr 2007 16:57:04 +0000 http://almaer.com/blog2/the-need-for-a-common-java-stack#comment-25494 I agree with you ocnsss. I agree with you ocnsss.

]]> By: ocnsss http://almaer.com/blog/the-need-for-a-common-java-stack/comment-page-1#comment-25493 ocnsss Sat, 31 Mar 2007 05:42:54 +0000 http://almaer.com/blog2/the-need-for-a-common-java-stack#comment-25493 On personal opinion, I find this very helpful. Guys, I have also posted some more relevant info further on this, not sure if you find it useful: http://www.bidmaxhost.com/forum/ On personal opinion, I find this very helpful.
Guys, I have also posted some more relevant info further on this, not sure if you find it useful: http://www.bidmaxhost.com/forum/

]]> By: David Carter http://almaer.com/blog/the-need-for-a-common-java-stack/comment-page-1#comment-25492 David Carter Tue, 02 Aug 2005 15:46:06 +0000 http://almaer.com/blog2/the-need-for-a-common-java-stack#comment-25492 Looks like SourceLabs does have a Java stack: SASH Stack for Java: http://www.sourcelabs.com/SASHStack.htm Spring, Axis, Struts, Hibernate, on Tomcat, WebLogic, or WebSphere, with Oracle 10g. I probably wouldn't pick Struts for new development, but the rest of this stack seems fairly solid. It would be nice to see JBoss as a supported option. Looks like SourceLabs does have a Java stack: SASH Stack for Java: http://www.sourcelabs.com/SASHStack.htm

Spring, Axis, Struts, Hibernate, on Tomcat, WebLogic, or WebSphere, with Oracle 10g. I probably wouldn’t pick Struts for new development, but the rest of this stack seems fairly solid. It would be nice to see JBoss as a supported option.

]]> By: Emmanuel Pirsch http://almaer.com/blog/the-need-for-a-common-java-stack/comment-page-1#comment-25491 Emmanuel Pirsch Tue, 02 Aug 2005 14:41:56 +0000 http://almaer.com/blog2/the-need-for-a-common-java-stack#comment-25491 [preparing-for-thunderstorm /] There is one common stack... it's called J2EE (soon to be JavaEE) ;-) To have a common stack mean to have standard. Means to have less innovative stuff. Actually, for the backend part, it's easy... There is roughly two options... Hibernate vs CMP (I know, there is more, but momentum wise, there is no other real choice)... And CMP is on the way down. For services, you have POJO which can be deployed on any distribution technology more or less transparently using lightweigth containers. The real trouble comes with the UI. Right now, there is just too many options to choose from with none of these (beside struts) that have a lot of momentum. With Ajax taking a lot of buzz these days, we have even more options. The number of framework and pace of evolution for the UI part of the stack make it difficult to commit to any of them. Beside there is no large enough common ground between these framework to have UI related code easily deployable on different framework. I don't think it is possible right now to commit to a full Java stack whitout commiting to an existing stable technology that will be "dead" soon. [preparing-for-thunderstorm /]

There is one common stack… it’s called J2EE (soon to be JavaEE) ;-)

To have a common stack mean to have standard. Means to have less innovative stuff.

Actually, for the backend part, it’s easy… There is roughly two options… Hibernate vs CMP (I know, there is more, but momentum wise, there is no other real choice)… And CMP is on the way down.

For services, you have POJO which can be deployed on any distribution technology more or less transparently using lightweigth containers.

The real trouble comes with the UI. Right now, there is just too many options to choose from with none of these (beside struts) that have a lot of momentum. With Ajax taking a lot of buzz these days, we have even more options. The number of framework and pace of evolution for the UI part of the stack make it difficult to commit to any of them.

Beside there is no large enough common ground between these framework to have UI related code easily deployable on different framework.

I don’t think it is possible right now to commit to a full Java stack whitout commiting to an existing stable technology that will be “dead” soon.

]]> By: Anonymous http://almaer.com/blog/the-need-for-a-common-java-stack/comment-page-1#comment-25490 Anonymous Tue, 02 Aug 2005 09:44:10 +0000 http://almaer.com/blog2/the-need-for-a-common-java-stack#comment-25490 I think quite a few big companies already do leverage their own "stacks". Some stacks may be proprietary (slow to evolve and pretty costly in the end), but some are based on known OSS components. I'm actually working at a big European car maker company which commoditized Struts + OJB + Castor + Ant or Maven for all their Java projects. Using a common stack makes a lot of sense because it reduces the training costs, the learning curve, and the risk of failure of a project (always someone who experienced the same issue and who will know the solution), it promotes more reusability, it's easier to get good support (both internally, and on the OSS project's respective mailing-lists), etc. A lot of advantages. The sole drawbacks we could mention is that these "stacks" tend to be somewhat more boring to work with because you're not "living on the edge" and using the most fashionable and innovative components available on the market place (no IoC, or other buzzwords). Moreover, it also happens that you're not using the latest version of each components of your stack if the guys behind the stack are slow to upgrade. But overall, a common stack across the company is a pretty good bet. I think quite a few big companies already do leverage their own “stacks”. Some stacks may be proprietary (slow to evolve and pretty costly in the end), but some are based on known OSS components.
I’m actually working at a big European car maker company which commoditized Struts + OJB + Castor + Ant or Maven for all their Java projects.
Using a common stack makes a lot of sense because it reduces the training costs, the learning curve, and the risk of failure of a project (always someone who experienced the same issue and who will know the solution), it promotes more reusability, it’s easier to get good support (both internally, and on the OSS project’s respective mailing-lists), etc. A lot of advantages.
The sole drawbacks we could mention is that these “stacks” tend to be somewhat more boring to work with because you’re not “living on the edge” and using the most fashionable and innovative components available on the market place (no IoC, or other buzzwords). Moreover, it also happens that you’re not using the latest version of each components of your stack if the guys behind the stack are slow to upgrade.
But overall, a common stack across the company is a pretty good bet.

]]> By: Michael Burke http://almaer.com/blog/the-need-for-a-common-java-stack/comment-page-1#comment-25489 Michael Burke Tue, 02 Aug 2005 07:37:38 +0000 http://almaer.com/blog2/the-need-for-a-common-java-stack#comment-25489 So, the idea behind a stack is essentially 'there's only one way to do it' and to have a common denominator for new developers, available books, training, conferences, coffee mugs etc etc. Surely that's the whole point of J2EE (sorry Java EE)? A standard web toolkit, a standard ORM, a standard deployment model, etc. I'm just not sure that the open source Java world stays still long enough to be able to define such a thing. If you tried to define such a stack 2 years ago it would look very different now I'd wager. regards Mike So, the idea behind a stack is essentially ‘there’s only one way to do it’ and to have a common denominator for new developers, available books, training, conferences, coffee mugs etc etc.

Surely that’s the whole point of J2EE (sorry Java EE)? A standard web toolkit, a standard ORM, a standard deployment model, etc.

I’m just not sure that the open source Java world stays still long enough to be able to define such a thing. If you tried to define such a stack 2 years ago it would look very different now I’d wager.

regards
Mike

]]>