posts - 4238, comments - 3946, trackbacks - 370

My Links


Subscribe Subscribe

image image image

This is my personal weblog. These postings are provided 'AS IS' with no warranties, and confer no rights. The views expressed on this weblog are mine alone and do not necessarily reflect the views of my employer.

Licenza Creative Commons

Tag Cloud


Post Categories

Implementare una soluzione .NET "costa" il 28% in meno di una J2EE?

Certo, David Chappel è famoso per le sue presentazioni con i vari confronti tra Java e .NET (tutte molto interessanti, soprattutto l'ultima tenuta a Barcellona che ha ispirato il penultimo webcast che ho tenuto), ed è sicuramente più nel campo Microsoft che in quello Java, ma se il dato che riporta è vero... beh... fa riflettere.

Anch'io lavoro in una società che usa sia Java, sia .NET, e mi sono fatto la mia opinione, basata su dati concreti. Naturalmente, o purtroppo, i dati ho deciso di tenerli per me, ma posso dirvi che vedere entrambi i lati del mondo mi fa sentire fortunato nell'essere dalla parte "giusta", almeno per i miei gusti personali. Poi come al solito tutto dipende, e ci sono altri tipi di esigenze, vincoli e contesti in cui la situazione si inverte. Ma come pensiero di Natale auguro alla piattaforma Java di continuare ad innovarsi, e a semplificarsi, per avere sempre uno stimolo che ci permetta di avere un .NET Framework sempre all'avanguardia...

Lots of people believe that developing applications on the .NET Framework is less complex than developing equivalent functionality on J2EE. Beliefs without evidence are just bias, however, and accurately measuring the relative complexity of these two platforms is hard. Finding objective, quantitative evidence for or against this belief isn't easy.
That's why I was so interested in a conversation I had recently with a senior architect at one of the global software development firms. He told me that to bid on projects, his firm first does a detailed requirements analysis of the problem, determining how many function points the solution will require. They then quote a price based on this commonly accepted measure of complexity.
Here's the interesting part: His firm, like all the big software houses, is happy to build the solution using either .NET or J2EE--it's up to the customer. But if the customer chooses .NET, the price is 28% less than if the customer chooses to build the same solution on J2EE.
Why is this true? Why should J2EE be more complex to use? There are a couple of obvious reasons. One of them is that its constituent technologies were created by committees, a process that rarely produces simple results. (Actually, J2EE isn't all that complex for a committee-created set of specs; there are plenty of worse examples.) A second reason for J2EE's complexity is that its creators seem willing to assume a fairly high degree of technical ability on the part of their users. With .NET, by contrast, Microsoft is well aware that it's designing technology that people who liked Visual Basic 6 must be able to adopt in some way. Controlling complexity is an essential part of achieving this.
The latest version of the enterprise Java specs, Java EE 5, made some effort to simplify a Java developer's life. Whether it succeeded in doing this is debatable; opinions differ. What's not debatable is that to be competitive in the long run, the Java platform can't be 28% more complex than its main competitor.

Fonte: Quantifying Complexity: .NET vs. J2EE

Print | posted on sabato 23 dicembre 2006 15:32 |

Comments have been closed on this topic.

Powered by:
Powered By Subtext Powered By ASP.NET