| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
Got Me Some Java Religion | |
|
||
| Time: 14:26 EST/19:26 GMT | News Source: ActiveWin.com | Posted By: Adrian Latinak | ||
|
So what is the deal with these Java guys? We get more than our fair share of personally-challenged individuals in this industry and many seem to hoard around some new mega-hype technology. Based on very little, these individuals crusade as to how this new way revolutionizes everything that came before. They ridicule anything that doesn't fit into their new model, mock the intelligence of anyone who disagrees and feel they can occupy the moral high ground. This is not an anti-Java article. Many of us have seen all this before, lived through it and even partaken in many of the crusades as the rally calls are made. Can the same be said of other engineering principles? Do bridge or airplane designers start a new crusade every few years, demanding all old bridges and aeroplanes were rubbish and should be pulled down and replaced with virtual bridges or virtual airplanes? | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 248 Last | Next |
The time now is
3:19:37 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 20 (24.243.32.227) at 1/5/2002 9:03:39 PM |
|
The Java arrogance is most easily explained with two things:
- Java was mainly designed and refined by academics which are, by nature, arrogant and pompus - The Java design mindset and core values are utopian in that its something we should all strive towards. The simple fact that someone would think differently is offensive to a Java developer. The second one is hard for many to swallow. The simple fact is that pure OO programming is the future. Having developed in several other non-OO languages before Java, I find the Java mindset very refreshing, structured, and goal oriented. It allows for luxuries such as writing to make tests and/or eXtreme Programming (XP). I'm very, very pleased to see the direction MS has taken with .NET and basically continued the evolution of Java and OO design and development. I consider .NET the Java Framework 2.0. So, to use the Java developer/Bridge Engineer analogy, it's akin to this: A bridge engineer discovers a way to make bridges sturdier, longer between spans, able to hold more weight, build faster, and last longer. It's simply a mindset. However, he has many problems convincing the rest of the Bridge Engineering world to convert to this new mindset simply because it seems to take longer up front (even though it really doesn't). It's just going to take awhile for the old-mindset-people to realize that the new way is better for many, many reasons and the software industry as a whole will be a better place. |
| #2 By 1295 (65.10.63.70) at 1/5/2002 10:40:47 PM |
|
daz-
I agree mainly with your entire comment. however, I believe your analogy to the "bridge engineer" is a little off. I think what he is saying is that if an engineer finds a better way to build a bridge he should not expect all engineers to tear down the current bridges and build them like his... also, he should not expect ALL bridges to be built with his same ideals. The same is true for programming. consider a small bridge that goes over a creek or small river to be a program that it is "ok" to build using Visual Basic. And a bridge like the golden gate would be something you would only trust to a hardened more stable language like C++. Then you have the new record breaking bridges that will try something new with the old and that would be like using C# and .NET. I'm a firm believer that you can use whatever programming language you want as long as it fits the requirements. Visual Basic is a great language for rapid small program developement. And C++ is great to build rock solid services. .Net fits in to allow your "rock solid" (man i cringe when typeing that... try not to flame me :) ) app that can do soo much more outta the box. i think this guy hits the nail on the head in this article. I do believe that java is dying in its original goals. Now most java is written to run on *nix boxes... i compare it to Visual Basic... I know that is wild to think of it that way... but as far as speed and stabiltiy its pretty much even in that race... sure java is for "real" programmers... but performance of the end result is the key. |
| #3 By 2332 (165.247.11.161) at 1/6/2002 1:47:25 AM |
|
#3 - "I'm very, very pleased to see the direction MS has taken with .NET and basically continued the evolution of Java and OO design and development. I consider .NET the Java Framework 2.0."
Java wasn't really any kind of "evolution" or step as far as OO design goes. Java basically poorly duplicated the truly OO nature of languages like SmallTalk and Effiel. Where both Smalltalk and Effiel have truly object oriented hierarchial design model, with *everything* deriving from Object (or the equiv), Java cheats by having basic primitives in addition to their object counterparts. C#, on the other hand, more perfectly duplicates (and improves on) the OO nature of SmallTalk and Effiel by having a unified root object hierarchy using a technique known as boxing. In my opinion, Java's only "innovation" was in the marketing. Virtual machines, "byte code", OO design, etc.. all existed long before Java. |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 248 Last | Next |
The time now is
3:19:37 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
