Link Details

Since the beginning of July, I've been working on a java project. The language is very close to C#, although it has some minor irritating differences, like the lack good generic support, extension methods and closures. The big difference however is not in the language, the tools, the libraries or the utilities. One of the big differences I've seen is the community.

Posted by mswatcher  |   Sep 01 2009 / 17:38

Add your comment


Html tags not supported. Reply is editable for 5 minutes. Use [code lang="java|ruby|sql|css|xml"][/code] to post code snippets.

Comments

User 338269 avatar

Miloskov replied ago:

Generic support in Java, Im agree Java needs to fix this ASAP. Extension methods and Closures are just syntatic sugar, it could be nice to have but I dont die to have it.

I agree with the author, Java Ecosystem is awesome and The Best. .Net will never have like that because M$ is behind it and it will never let it free. Maybe embrace few OSS projects but not the other way around.

Reply 3 votes
User 201685 avatar

lnguyen replied ago:

I've observed the same thing. This is all anecdotal, but the .net guys generally stick to whatever MS tells them to use.

Reply 2 votes
User 152955 avatar

Gregg Bolinger replied ago:

The first comment on the actual article is more interesting than the article itself. Being a Java developer, I've known this for years. But what I didn't realize is the fact that MS competes with its own community. I find that interesting, sad, and very counter productive for the community. Sucks to be you. Voted up for the comment. :)

Reply 1 votes
User 152955 avatar

Gregg Bolinger replied ago:

BTW, MS does this to try and keep the community tied to its tools, which is where the money comes in.

Reply 1 votes
User 265881 avatar

Topnotch replied ago:

As Gregg already pointed out the first comment is pretty accurate about the behavior of MS. I think more than anything the biggest upshot of developing for Windows is the audience thats willing to spend money that can be reached with your software. I'm serious about creating a profitable business around software and services and this just isn't happenning in the OSS or Linux communities. They simply believe everything should be free and hope that you can obfuscate and make your software as unusable as possible so you can make the money back on support. I respect these guys for their skills in software development which is why I follow Java and OSS technical developments but their business acumen and general usuabilty of their software is a joke and quite frankly unsustainable. Sun being bought out by Oracle and not the other way around should be your first clue.

Reply 0 votes
User 261293 avatar

joecoder replied ago:

You seem to be quite uninformed. When you create a OSS company like MySQL AB that sold for a $1 billion or a company like JBoss or Interface 21 that sold for $100's of mllions (just a few examples) then you will be more qualified to criticise OSS business acumen. As a Java developer currently being forced to work with .NET, I have to say the VS developer tool usability is the true joke compared to the Java tools. Even so, it's apparently still a sustainable business model for MS. It's a strange world. (As an aside, I'm not a .NET hater in general, I like many of the C# language features compared to Java).

Reply 0 votes
User 265881 avatar

Topnotch replied ago:

No, I'm not misinformed at all. I'm very aware of human nature. Many people take without giving and that's a fact.
Of course, MS has a sustainable business model. How many times have you had to tell your friends or relatives that they need to recompile the kernel or some other complex nonsense in order to get what they want done with Windows? About VS it is by far one of the simplest and easiest to use IDEs ever made. You can just quickly and easily get things done with little to no learning curve. This is why more people are using Windows in general; it's just simpler and they are wiling to pay for this simplicity as well.
As for your arguments about the business sustainability of OSS. I believe you have pointed out the exceptions to the rule. OSS is not a sustainable way to run or maintain a software company. Ask yourself, if you were to create a OSS project right now how many people would donate or pay you for support? How many people would just take the code and not give you anything at all? Did you notice that all the OSS companies that you mentioned were sold and are no longer owned by their original proprietors? It really doesn't appear all that sustainable to me.
With that said, I must say that I've read lots of your comments on Dzone and I've agreed with most of them but here we do have some disagreements :-)

Reply 0 votes
User 261293 avatar

joecoder replied ago:

Maybe I just had too much coffee this morning or maybe there is some nuance of sustainability that I'm missing. However, selling a company voluntarily for very large sums of money is generally not considered a business failure. The companies spending that money obviously are doing so because they believe the income from the purchased company's business model (or a modified version of it) is sustainable. I do agree the incomplete list of OSS companies that have sold for relatively large sums of money is more the exception than the rule. However, even commercially successful non-OSS companies are the exception to the rule (where most fail to find enough people to pay them for their product for the company to survive). As for VS, we'll have to agree to disagree. The damn thing can't even keep up with my typing speed on an 8 core high-end development box. Without Resharper and similar add-ons, there's really no comparison with the top Java IDE's. Your comment about kernels is interesting. Recently we've been needing to get some indepth technical support from MS to deal with kernel-level issues in Windows 7 64 bit. Of course, we couldn't patch and recompile the kernel ourselves since we don't have the source. ;-)

Reply 1 votes
User 265881 avatar

Topnotch replied ago:

Yes there was a nuance of sustainability you missed you won't see any of these OSS companies in existence in 30-50 years more than likely. Those companies that purchased the OSS companies may believe them to be sustainable but it really isn't. As for what you said about kernels you're addressing the problems you ran into as a developer, I was addressing what the average user needs to do to use Windows i.e. they don't need to worry about the kernel to get things done. Again my reasons for choosing .NET is the potential audience that will buy software which with OSS people in general don't believe in paying for software period. That is indeed unsustainable much more so than the non-OSS companies in comparision.

Reply 0 votes
User 338269 avatar

Miloskov replied ago:

There is something wrong about your comment you said: "which with OSS people in general don't believe in paying for software period". Thats wrong. I use and develope OSS software but also I charge for my software I made and also I pay for software as for example I have a license of Intellij IDEA and a license of Windows Vista and I also use OSS software that cost money for my server I use Redhat enterprise server.

OSS does not need to be as a free beer,It could be like a free speech. You can have the Source of my code but I will charge you money. So not all the OSS people in general don't believe in paying for software period.

Reply 1 votes
User 261293 avatar

joecoder replied ago:

This discussion is off-topic for the related article and so this will be my last comment in the thread, but I still think you are lacking some important information. Obviously you are guessing what will happen 30-50 years from now. It's also possible that most software will be OSS (not necessarily zero cost OSS) in that timeframe. Compare the situation 10-20 years ago with today and you'll see a trend worth considering. Secondly, there are a variety of OSS business models that do involve commercial use licensing or payment for value added services or features. No offense intended, but your views on OSS and Java both seem to be from an outsider perspective rather than from someone who has deep experience with either topic.

Reply 0 votes
User 265881 avatar

Topnotch replied ago:

The article did mention OSS and how the .NET community responds to it and my comments on it were inspired by that. Yes you're correct I am an outsider and so are most of the people who have up voted this article and commented on the .NET community. I wouldn't necessarily say that about you but I'm fairly certain that others haven't even used the tools or worked with any .NET developers but claim that by default .NET developers don't understand IoC, law of demeter, only think to use MS sponsored tools, etc, which is just wrong. I apologize for my anger but I was deeply offended by the gross generalizations that lnguyen, and the article author have happily touted as if it were fact. I just wanted to inject a different perspective outside of the usual pro-Java and anti-.NET sentiment and bias that is usually so prevalent on Dzone. I believe Java is a fine language but I don't like extreme bias in any form whether it be for .NET, Java or any other subject. I really wasn't upset with you man. Peace.

Reply 0 votes
User 426965 avatar

reboltutorial replied ago:

Here the Religious War again, as for me I don't believe in One God or One Language nor in God Loves You nor in Sun or Microsoft Loves You :)

Reply 0 votes
User 417127 avatar

dcortez replied ago:

Your right theres a big difference. .NET developers cant think because they are tool driven monkeys.

Go on to a .NET forum and find someone who can code. Seriously.

Reply -1 votes

Recommended Links

Scala
Written by: Ryan Knight
Featured Refcardz: Top Refcardz:
  1. Apache Hadoop
  2. Play
  3. Akka
  4. Debugging JavaScript
  5. Design Patterns
  1. Apache Hadoop
  2. REST
  3. Java
  4. Git
  5. Java Performance
Connect with DZone