But the sad thing is that the new IT seems to want no development (or as
little as possible). These frameworks you are mentioning whether
purchased or not are used by teams to develop apps. The new IT would
rather just buy something such as Siebel.


From: "Dmitri Colebatch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "John Harby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: the truth about entity beans
Date: Sun, 13 Oct 2002 09:59:48 +1000

I dont believe I mentioned buying anything...  my argument in that email
was
that you shouldn't be re-inventing the wheel, or inventing a wheel that
others also need.  There are many useful open source frameworks out there
that are valid alternatives to ejb...  in terms of persistence and O/R
mapping, castor comes to mind.

----- Original Message -----
From: "John Harby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2002 8:50 AM
Subject: Re: the truth about entity beans


> Yeah, as some of my views of late integration has become the IT mantra.
> Even the EJB container is not enough buy for IT. More and more are
wanting
> to buy and not build. Providers such as Siebel are actually offering
entire
> e-commerce sites "out of the box" (although I would expect a good deal
of
> effort to get these working ;)). Here is one site that is doing this
> already: http://www.tidalwire.com/default.htm
>
>
> >From: Dmitri Colebatch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Reply-To: Dmitri Colebatch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >Subject: Re: the truth about entity beans
> >Date: Sun, 13 Oct 2002 08:21:00 +1000
> >
> > > > > > transaction management, etc.
> > > > >
> > > > > You have to be more specific. JDBC does
> > > > > transactions.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > yes, but it does not do transaction management.
> > >
> > > That still doesn't explain it.  Doing searches on the web seems to
> > > suggest that there most references seem to think that there is
little
or
> > > no difference.
> > >
> > > So perhaps you could provide an example or a reference that explains
the
> > > difference?
> >
> >The real difference (in my view) is the transparent (from a coding pov)
> >support of XA.  To be honest, I'm not sure what is meant by
"transaction
> >management" in this context.  But here's my understanding of the
advantages
> >of ejb tx model:
> >   - XA support (can send JMS message and update db, or two dbs, in the
one
> >tx)
> >   - transaction demarkation (can have some methods that must execute
in
> >their own tx, and some that must create new tx, and some that never use
a
> >tx... and so on)
> >both these features come without writing code.
> >
> > > I do not understand your point.  I was trying to point out that
> > > understanding how to configure the container so it uses those
wonderful
> > > features takes time.  And is sometimes impossible.  The alternative
is
> > > writing code to do some or all of the same thing.  Presumably if
someone
> > > writes the code then they do understand how to use it.  Naturally
one
> > > alternative is to hire and expert from the container vendor and have
> > > them configure it correctly.  But whether one figures it out
themself
or
> > > hires an expert it still costs.  And that step must be factored into
the
> > > calculation of the overall cost of the two alternatives.
> >
> >Ahh yes... and here's the real cruncher.  OK, I'm more than happy for
> >someone to say "framework X is more appropriate for my requirements
than
> >EJB", but saying "thats too hard to set up, and its cheaper to roll my
own"
> >is hard to see being entirely accurate.  Writing your own framework (or
> >worse still not using a framework) means you will have more lines of
code
> >to
> >maintain, and hence more bugs to fix.  Sure, EJB containers have bugs,
but
> >at least its not your responsibility to fix them.
> >
> >We are still yet to see a suggestion for an alternative framework in
this
> >thread.
> >
> >my 2c
> >
> >cheers
> >dim
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com
>
>
===========================================================================
> To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the
body
> of the message "signoff EJB-INTEREST".  For general help, send email to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help".
>



_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com

===========================================================================
To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body
of the message "signoff EJB-INTEREST".  For general help, send email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help".

Reply via email to