iBATIS will always be different for one simple reason: iBATIS is not an ORM.
As you've said, EJB3 is basically a specification designed by a committee including Hibernate, Toplink and other vendors. All the reasons you've chosen to use iBATIS will stand true when you compare against EJB3, Hibernate, TopLink or any other ORM.
EJB3 simply standardizes what was formerly proprietary, which is important to some people.
If you have any question as to the popularity of iBATIS, simply go here:
(for future, the above stats may no longer be available, once the DTDs move to Apache completely)
On 1/5/06, Jose Luis Monteagudo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello all, friends,
I'm working on my projects with iBatis two years ago more or less, and I found that iBatis was the best way to map my SQL's to Objects. Now we have a new persistence standar, EJB3, that promises that persistence will be very easy to implement in our new projects. EJB3 is quite similar to Hibernate, but until now iBatis fits better on my projects than Hibernate.
Without purpose to offend and without purpose to create a war, I would like to know if somebody that had tested EJB3, could explain if on new projects is better to use iBatis or EJB3. I know that it depends on some factors, it depends on the type of the application and it depends on the schema design of the database, but could somebody explain his/her thoughts about if EJB3 will be universally spreaded and will finish killing iBatis, or iBatis will continue being a solid option to persist our objects ?
Thank you very much for your time