On Friday 25 October 2002 08:30 pm, Jon Scott Stevens wrote: > on 2002/10/25 5:16 PM, "Andrew C. Oliver" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I wish we did have something that supported a non-crappy interface like > > EOB (eob.sourceforge.net) > > Stuff like this reminds me of Velocity vs. JSP argument. > > People realize that EJB sucks ass, so they develop something that is simple > to use and implement and makes some real sense...while the whole time, we > have Sun pushing their J2EE crap down our throats. >
Sun has a lot of trouble backing away from the 1.0 decisions they make, even when they turn out to be wrong. MSFT does a bit better by renaming the technology and walking away from the old one. c.v. DCOM -> MTS -> .NET Still, container based declarative transactional components are a nice idea. Writing data non-transactionally will eventually get you into trouble. Reading isn't the same problem. And being able to join many components into a single transaction without advance planning make a lot of deep problems rather simple. But the notion that a database row is a good remote object, even without the overhead of transactionality, is just BAD. > Maybe once Sun's stock price dips below 1.0 will they wake up... > Nah, I'm sure CA would acquire it then, and then there'd be boardroom pressure to use it as the solution to everything. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:general-unsubscribe@;jakarta.apache.org> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:general-help@;jakarta.apache.org>
