Re: RAC vs. J2EE

On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 17:47:39 -0800, Noons wrote:

>
> Couldn't agree more. Do yu have any written info on
> this "backdown" or "acknowledgement"? I sure could use
> it. To rub in some arse faces around here...

Sadly, nothing in writing - the authors would get lynched, especially since they represent some core people & companies in the Java and persistent framework industries.

However, as I've quoted several times, in Tate & Gehtland's "Better, Faster, Lighter Java" (O'Reilly - 0-596-00676-4) I particularily like the following:

p8: "To be more specific, success drives bloat"

p17: "Simplicity should be a core value for all Java programmers, but

       it's not."

p91: (On J2EE) "Most applications don't need J2EE" and "Many

     applications should deploy with nothing more than a servlet
     container, a web server, and a database connection."

p93: "EJB is not so much a golden hammer as a glass hammer.  The idea may
      be pretty to look at, but it's much less impressive in practice."  

There are many more comments, but these (including the above) need to be taken in the correct context. And part of that context is that J2EE is overkill in many, if not most, situations.

I am a Java and J2EE trainer, as well as an Oracle consultant and trainer and have been griping about the increasing complexity of Java for a while now. I was absolutely thrilled when I saw someone daring to say the same thing in print.

atb/FGB Received on Thu Feb 17 2005 - 21:00:04 CST