J2EE vs .Net

[Asymptote]

I'm learning about these two development environments and I was wondering what your thoughts are on the differences between the two, specifically from a standpoint of integration to existing environments and interoperability? For example, I thought .Net was proprietary to M$oft and can only run in their environments, whereas J2EE is proprietary but can be run on multiple platforms. What are some other comparisons/contrasts between the two? What do you favour?

[azcodemonkey]

I've yet to meet anyone with depth in both technologies, so I sincerely doubt you'll be getting, uuummm, unbiased answers. I'm sure they both have plusses and minuses, but they both get the job done. Really, your questions, especially when you include the $ in MS, are probably going to invoke a mudslinging contest.

Frankly, I like working with MS tools and languages. I think MS has the best tools around, and I'm quite fond of C#. I don't work enough in Java to speak to it. I do know that I missed a lot of C# features when I had to use Java for a couple of courses. But, that was years ago and a lot has changed. The few people I do know that have worked a bit in J2EE are happy to be in .NET.

Technically, .NET can run on multiple platforms, too. Mobile, web, *nix(via Mono), and Windows. I've yet to be in a company that had such a heterogeneous environment that they needed both Java and .NET. At best, I've been in places that have both AS/400 and Microsoft servers, and we can communicate with the AS400 stuff just fine. I think the majority of interoperability between Java and .NET is going to come from web services or generic protocols, and not at a link level.

I've been using .NET since its inception and I think its growth is fantastic. It's a great platform to work on, and the tools are excellent. Again, I cannot speak to Java. I think C# is advancing at a more rapid pace than Java, and personally, think it is the better of the two in terms of consistency and expressiveness(from what I recall having to deal with in school). As anything in technology, it all changes, so take this stance with a grain of salt. By no means is my opinion an assault on Java. It is a great tool by all accounts, and has a great developer base. I learn a lot from that camp. Of the two, I think Java has the most mature developer base and probably the most depth in the engineering discipline. I think .NET is catching up, tho.

[Asymptote]

Hey man, you presented your opinion and I respect that :) I agree that perhaps I shouldn't make it sound so biased - my fault I'm an open-source user :) Thanks for replying and I think it provides some decent insight.

[_kane81]

^^

excellent answer....

  Quote

thought .Net was proprietary to M$oft and can only run in their environments, whereas J2EE is proprietary but can be run on multiple platforms.

both are open standards, thus why you have the mono project (no one that I know of uses mono in corprate world).

So MS and Sun publish the specs. to be a certified J2EE vendor such as BEA, you need to meet specs specified by Sun.

lots of corps like runnin unix... so J2EE is I would say preferred. Though I am bias towards J2EE as that is the area I work in.

I think I agree with this statement

"I think Java has the most mature developer base and probably the most depth in the engineering discipline".

[Asymptote]

  _kane81 said:

both are open standards, thus why you have the mono project (no one that I know of uses mono in corprate world).

So MS and Sun publish the specs. to be a certified J2EE vendor such as BEA, you need to meet specs specified by Sun.

lots of corps like runnin unix... so J2EE is I would say preferred. Though I am bias towards J2EE as that is the area I work in.

I think I agree with this statement

"I think Java has the most mature developer base and probably the most depth in the engineering discipline".

Wow these are excellent points that I never even considered. It makes sense that .Net typically roll out things (such as whatever it contributed to Vista) which was arguably inappropriate for the needs of the market because of its serious flaws, and I've not seen this sort of thing originate from Sun. I like your points about certifications.

[sbauer]

  Asymptote said:

Wow these are excellent points that I never even considered. It makes sense that .Net typically roll out things (such as whatever it contributed to Vista) which was arguably inappropriate for the needs of the market because of its serious flaws, and I've not seen this sort of thing originate from Sun.

What? :huh:

[azcodemonkey]

  Asymptote said:

Wow these are excellent points that I never even considered. It makes sense that .Net typically roll out things (such as whatever it contributed to Vista) which was arguably inappropriate for the needs of the market because of its serious flaws, and I've not seen this sort of thing originate from Sun. I like your points about certifications.

.NET doesn't have serious flaws, nor does MS' OS platforms nor its database server, and _kane81 wasn't implying that it did. He was merely saying that there are companies that prefer unix, which makes J2EE the preferred platform for them. Mono isn't mature enough to bet your business on just yet.

I work for a fairly large company with soon to be over 500 stores running on Microsoft platforms. We have to have 24/7 uptime as we are a convenience store chain. Our AS400 stuff is for our accounting system. We are converting to .NET in many areas, albeit with some growing pains, but we're finding better reliability and resilience in the platform than what we have/had in VB/ASP/COM, mainly due to the change in programming paradigm and a more robust platform. Most, if not all of the problems we have are due to developer problems, not platform problems.

[_kane81]

Asymptote

I think you have misuderstood my post... (as stated above)

[Asymptote]

  _kane81 said:

Asymptote

I think you have misuderstood my post... (as stated above)

When I said "serious flaws" I was thinking of things like the emails between Msoft execs saying what a horrible o/s Vista was yet they had to sell it, or all the problems XP had before it got its first service pack. Aren't those operating systems written in the .Net environment?

[Andre S. Veteran]

Most problems at launch with XP and Vista were driver-related and had nothing to do with the .NET framework, and as drivers mature they reveal themselves as versatile, fast and reliable operating systems.

Besides, XP was released 1 year before version 1.0 of the .NET framework. :rolleyes:

[wellofsouls]

I've worked with both C# (.NET) and J2EE (JSP, servlet, beans) in the past, I'd say it's easier to get a project start and running with C#, while there are more mature and open frameworks for J2EE, for example struts + hibernate. But then I'm not too familiar with MVC frameworks in .NET

[Asymptote]

  wellofsouls said:

I've worked with both C# (.NET) and J2EE (JSP, servlet, beans) in the past, I'd say it's easier to get a project start and running with C#, while there are more mature and open frameworks for J2EE, for example struts + hibernate. But then I'm not too familiar with MVC frameworks in .NET

Thank you, Asik. I wasn't sure if it was because of inabilities of .Net or something else. Just one of those things I learn as I read more about this.

[Antaris Veteran]

  Asymptote said:

Aren't those operating systems written in the .Net environment?

XP and Vista are not written in .NET. .NET is a platform that sits on top of the OS. The OSes themselves are written in a blend of Assembly, C, C++, etc.

There is research going into writing an OS using mostly managed code (such as Singularity), although there will probably always be parts written in lower level languages.