Re: The demise of the Oracle professional?

"Niall Litchfield" <niall.litchfield_at_dial.pipex.com> wrote in message news:<3d066225$0$8512$cc9e4d1f_at_news.dial.pipex.com>...
> "Nuno Souto" <nsouto_at_optushome.com.au.nospam> wrote in message
> news:3d061ea1$0$28004$afc38c87_at_news.optusnet.com.au...
> > In article <ae56fm$4167m$1_at_ID-87429.news.dfncis.de>, you said (and I
> > quote):
> > >
> > > "Niall Litchfield" <n-litchfield_at_audit-commission.gov.uk>
> > >
> > > > > 2-tier (client-server) is not enough anymore, you know. How can
> > > > > you achive load balancing with client-server architecture? How can
> > > > > you achieve dynamic redeployment (software upgrades while the
> > > > > system is running)? Fail-over? Clustering? Message-oriented
> > > > > architecture?
> > > >
> > > > Seems to me that that is an argument for n-tier (where n = 3
> > > > <vbg>) architecture 3-tier is not the same as j2ee.
> > >
> > > J2EE is a superset of 3-tier architecture.
> > > What's your question?
> >
> >
> > I've got a funny feeling he means: you can NOT claim as a J2EE advantage
> > a bucket load of features that have NOTHING to do with J2EE.
> > But then again, I may be wrong and we're speaking marketish, not
> > English...
>
> Damn you've got me sussed Nuno! The above arguments apply equally well to
> dotnet or just good old fashioned app servers. I'd also argue with the
> statement that client server isn't good enough any more. we know it (mostly)
> works so any replacement architecture has to deal with real problems as
> experienced by real organisations. for example in many many organisations
> dynamic redeployment is just a non issue you just do it in your scheduled
> maintenance window since most orgs are not in any way 24/7 (except in the 7
> hours a day 24 days a month sense). Hell, even the major banks shut down
> customer facing systems for maintenance on a reasonably regular basis
> (though I'm too old to be using ATM's at 4am these days so I don't care).
>

The fact that a thread on Oracle quickly turned into a debate on Java/J2EE tells you there is a lot of interest there. Java is not useless, nor is it everything. Safe to say that its capabilities sit somewhere in between. I am sure we'll find a more complete list of pros and cons in the Java group.

Java applications have come a long way in the last few years in terms of speed and scalability, but it still won't challenge C or C++ when building something requiring serious performance, such as databases. In addition to being portable, it also exists as a rapid development tool. I've been in that environment, and I've seen how quickly one can put together an application that actually works. It would've taken at least twice that long using C/C++. So Java has its places, and it doesn't rely on Windows. Also don't underestimate the importance of user support. Availability of the large number of Java developers pretty much gauranttees it won't disappear as a major development tool anytime soon. Received on Wed Jun 12 2002 - 00:21:33 CDT