Re: Java to die in 2003

On Thu, 26 Dec 2002, bob_at_dpsp-yes.com wrote:
> Well, that's just my personal attitude - I dislike everything
> that is unnecessary complex and basically denies KISS
> principle. J2EE is just that sort of technology - it is very
> complex, and it applies the requirement for complexity to
> everything you do. Just look how complex it is to maintain
> persistence in a BMP bean (or even in a CMP one, though it's
> much simpler)

Its quite complex to do what the J2EE architecture is offering by coding it on your own. Whether you need what the container is going to do for you or not is another issue, but, if you need it, I'd rather code to the interfaces required.

> and how much additional classes are needed, and how much
> additional work they do for a simple task of storing and
> retrieving a row from database table... And this inherent
> complexity is everywhere in J2EE...

Not sure what's so incredibly complex about J2EE. The complexity arises because 15 other jakarta packages get stuck in the middle of two objects talking to each other. Does everything that's passed around need to be serializable XML? Why is this such an imperative thing, that the client to the EJB's needs to recieve XML? Why can't they just talk OO speak?

> But sure it gives J2EE developers a good opportunity for
> excellent earnings (and for hardware makers too, because you
> certainly need very powerful and expensive hardware to run
> these J2EE monsters...) :)

Yeah, I guess there is some truth in that. But, then, we Oracle developers like that Oracle is a complex beast as well.

-- 
Galen Boyer