Comments on: Standarize on Java platform rather than Java language http://blog.xebia.com/2007/12/06/standarize-on-java-platform-rather-than-java-language/ Thu, 11 Mar 2010 16:23:01 +0100 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: RubberBaron http://blog.xebia.com/2007/12/06/standarize-on-java-platform-rather-than-java-language/comment-page-1/#comment-30924 RubberBaron Sat, 19 Jan 2008 00:33:25 +0000 http://blog.xebia.com/2007/12/06/standarize-on-java-platform-rather-than-java-language/#comment-30924 "...are afraid to loose our investments." What? As opposed to tightening your investments? (It's lose, not loose). “…are afraid to loose our investments.”

What? As opposed to tightening your investments? (It’s lose, not loose).

]]> By: Lars Vonk http://blog.xebia.com/2007/12/06/standarize-on-java-platform-rather-than-java-language/comment-page-1/#comment-27419 Lars Vonk Mon, 10 Dec 2007 22:19:43 +0000 http://blog.xebia.com/2007/12/06/standarize-on-java-platform-rather-than-java-language/#comment-27419 @all: Thanks for the replies. @Carsten: I think you should always take care in selecting your programming languages. By standardizing on platform you already kind of narrow the languages available. Maybe organizations can let the developers/maintenance decide together which languages they want to use. @Vikas: Why should business organizations only standardize on mainstream? I think if you want faster time to market then your competitor you should sometimes invest and try out something new to beat your competitor right? @all: Thanks for the replies.

@Carsten: I think you should always take care in selecting your programming languages. By standardizing on platform you already kind of narrow the languages available. Maybe organizations can let the developers/maintenance decide together which languages they want to use.

@Vikas: Why should business organizations only standardize on mainstream? I think if you want faster time to market then your competitor you should sometimes invest and try out something new to beat your competitor right?

]]> By: Raghuraman Ramaswamy http://blog.xebia.com/2007/12/06/standarize-on-java-platform-rather-than-java-language/comment-page-1/#comment-27100 Raghuraman Ramaswamy Fri, 07 Dec 2007 06:58:36 +0000 http://blog.xebia.com/2007/12/06/standarize-on-java-platform-rather-than-java-language/#comment-27100 Yes there is a plus point in being open to standardising on the platform than the language. But most projects have common functionality and unique stuff. Somehow nothing gets re-used except the existing standard frameworks when possible. Me new here. But do we have any efforts of building a framework on top of existing frameworks, or minimising rampup time for any projects. The issue what I find usually is not with Java as a language itself. But its usually how work is not done in a way to be reusable across projects. Its a difficulat task given so many compleities. I tend to stay with Java because its so powerful. It will be such a shame if we cannot solve the puzzle of using Java properly and making solutions that are productized and reusbale as a habit. Yes there is a plus point in being open to standardising on the platform than the language.
But most projects have common functionality and unique stuff. Somehow nothing gets re-used except the existing standard frameworks when possible. Me new here. But do we have any efforts of building a framework on top of existing frameworks, or minimising rampup time for any projects. The issue what I find usually is not with Java as a language itself. But its usually how work is not done in a way to be reusable across projects. Its a difficulat task given so many compleities.
I tend to stay with Java because its so powerful. It will be such a shame if we cannot solve the puzzle of using Java properly and making solutions that are productized and reusbale as a habit.

]]> By: Peter Veentjer http://blog.xebia.com/2007/12/06/standarize-on-java-platform-rather-than-java-language/comment-page-1/#comment-27002 Peter Veentjer Thu, 06 Dec 2007 15:46:32 +0000 http://blog.xebia.com/2007/12/06/standarize-on-java-platform-rather-than-java-language/#comment-27002 Martin fowler recently wrote a very nice blog about the same subject: http://www.martinfowler.com/bliki/OneLanguage.html Martin fowler recently wrote a very nice blog about the same subject:

http://www.martinfowler.com/bliki/OneLanguage.html

]]> By: Machiel Groeneveld http://blog.xebia.com/2007/12/06/standarize-on-java-platform-rather-than-java-language/comment-page-1/#comment-26950 Machiel Groeneveld Thu, 06 Dec 2007 09:37:29 +0000 http://blog.xebia.com/2007/12/06/standarize-on-java-platform-rather-than-java-language/#comment-26950 If we think new programming languages will increase our productivity our customers should be on the same side. I seriously wonder where the reluctance comes from, the customer or the developers. I agree there is risk involved in using new technology, but also opportunity. Modern business choices evolve around takings risks, if you don't take any risks it's not worth doing. So let's involve our customer in making that choice: get your new software much quicker with some risks that we can manage or run the risk of being overrun by the competition (which is much harder to manage) If we think new programming languages will increase our productivity our customers should be on the same side. I seriously wonder where the reluctance comes from, the customer or the developers. I agree there is risk involved in using new technology, but also opportunity. Modern business choices evolve around takings risks, if you don’t take any risks it’s not worth doing. So let’s involve our customer in making that choice: get your new software much quicker with some risks that we can manage or run the risk of being overrun by the competition (which is much harder to manage)

]]> By: IronRuby http://blog.xebia.com/2007/12/06/standarize-on-java-platform-rather-than-java-language/comment-page-1/#comment-26939 IronRuby Thu, 06 Dec 2007 08:18:48 +0000 http://blog.xebia.com/2007/12/06/standarize-on-java-platform-rather-than-java-language/#comment-26939 Hi, I think Microsoft has taken a right approach for the first time in this direction. They have decided to go the " DLR " way. that means many dynamic languages can run on the same platform. This will eliminate the needs to hire programmers of all types of languages. Ruby, Python, VB( Dynamic), C#, Vb.Net, C++ all this languages can be implemented and the plus point is that you can extend the code written in language in our own way. That means i can extend/Use the code by a C# developer in my own ironruby code. I agree that the platforms are important, but there should be freedom in Languages and Databases. IronRuby Hi,

I think Microsoft has taken a right approach for the first time in this direction. They have decided to go the ” DLR ” way. that means many dynamic languages can run on the same platform.

This will eliminate the needs to hire programmers of all types of languages. Ruby, Python, VB( Dynamic), C#, Vb.Net, C++ all this languages can be implemented and the plus point is that you can extend the code written in language in our own way.

That means i can extend/Use the code by a C# developer in my own ironruby code.

I agree that the platforms are important, but there should be freedom in Languages and Databases.

IronRuby

]]> By: Vikas Hazrati http://blog.xebia.com/2007/12/06/standarize-on-java-platform-rather-than-java-language/comment-page-1/#comment-26899 Vikas Hazrati Thu, 06 Dec 2007 04:22:39 +0000 http://blog.xebia.com/2007/12/06/standarize-on-java-platform-rather-than-java-language/#comment-26899 I think the restriction/reluctance to stay with a language is to lower the risk for failure and stay with a mature/proven language. Most of the new languages even though they can work on the JVM would have to cross the chasm to become mainstream. That is not to say that they would fall on the side. This would (and should) however be different for two types of organizations. The business organizations who use technology as an enabler. They would consider other languages only once they have become mainstream and have proven industry support. The technology companies however should standardize to the platform. They should keep evaluating new languages as you have suggested and help business make wise decisions by educating them. I think the restriction/reluctance to stay with a language is to lower the risk for failure and stay with a mature/proven language. Most of the new languages even though they can work on the JVM would have to cross the chasm to become mainstream. That is not to say that they would fall on the side.

This would (and should) however be different for two types of organizations.

The business organizations who use technology as an enabler. They would consider other languages only once they have become mainstream and have proven industry support.

The technology companies however should standardize to the platform. They should keep evaluating new languages as you have suggested and help business make wise decisions by educating them.

]]> By: Carsten http://blog.xebia.com/2007/12/06/standarize-on-java-platform-rather-than-java-language/comment-page-1/#comment-26879 Carsten Thu, 06 Dec 2007 01:08:18 +0000 http://blog.xebia.com/2007/12/06/standarize-on-java-platform-rather-than-java-language/#comment-26879 In principle I agree: Pick the right tool to do the job right. But in larger organizations it is only half of the story. How many Ruby, Perl, Scala hackers do you have to maintain the code? Even if you master all these languages, who will replace you? In principle I agree: Pick the right tool to do the job right. But in larger organizations it is only half of the story. How many Ruby, Perl, Scala hackers do you have to maintain the code? Even if you master all these languages, who will replace you?

]]>