TSSS Day 2 lunch keynote
The lunch keynote was provided courtesy of Oracle, and was (somewhat controversially titled ‘Does J2EE (still) matter’.
The speaker however seems to have some very odd concepts of what is and what isn’t J2EE. His example of ‘non-J2EE’ stuff included things like Spring and other such frameworks, all of which would be rather pointless without J2EE.
This actually touches on a pretty surprising misconception that a lot of the monkeys here have. Spring (to cite an example) is NOT a replacement for J2EE. Without J2EE, Spring would not exist. All is it is a extra layer of civilisation that sits on top of the J2EE stack and makes life easier for a certain class of problems.
A good point raised by the speaker also is the difference between how audiences receive open sores crap vs vendor solution crap. An open source talk is applauded for some reason and viewed as somehow being altruistic or noble, whereas the exact same talk delivered about a non-OS product is viewed as an underhanded vendor pitch. There is something particularly revolting about seeing all these talk about custom proprietary solutions (spring, tapestry, random OS crap) being viewed as legitimate in such conferences, whereas closed source stuff being treated as red haired step child that must never be spoken about in civilised society.
Next we move onto saying how great EJB3 is. Gosh, do these people never get tired of this? We get it already, EJB3 is nicer than EJB2. We believe it, lets move on for fuck’s sake. Please please, no more words of wisdom about how wonderfully testable EJB3 is. I’m going to stab the next person who says ‘lightweight container’ in the face with a blunt spoon.
Of course, no EJB3 talk is complete without code samples. Instead of the savvy pertinent snippets that Linda’s talks have (come back Linda, all is forgiven!) we here have huge huge chunks of code that nobody can actually read. This is actually pretty common throughout many talks. What is it about writing code in a small font that’s so sexually gratifying to these speakers?
Having pimped oracle’s EJB3 stuff and convinced us all that JDeveloper is a horrible IDE, we now move onto the joys of JSF.
Oracle has, for some inexplicable reason, developed a disturbing JSF fetish. The speaker is, surprise surprise, one of those dolts who thinks that JSF is there to be written by competent ‘by-hand’ type developers. There really is an idiot born every minute.
The hilarity really kicks off when Ted shows off orablogs. His concept of ‘customisable UI’ is firmly 1998 material. The site looks like someone had a terrible underwear accident, and accidentally smeared the outcome on a webpage. This portion of the presentation captures perfectly a very common blind spot that java web monkeys have. Why, for the love of god, do these people think that a developer should be allowed anywhere near a UI? Most developers couldn’t design a UI if their worthless little lives depended on it. They’re all straight lines and table borders and ‘ooh look at mee look at meee I’m xhtml compatible!’
Even more ironically, his example of ‘how easy it is to write JSF’ by hand does everything it can to prove it isn’t. It requires a custom IDE, the code block for a table is roughly the size of a respectable swing custom component (including painting code). The IDE is all about custom panels for editing properties, and there’s so much JSF awareness that the whole thing makes for a great ‘fuck you java developers!’ demo. They should sell it to IBM in fact, it’s THAT bad.
To add icing to the cake, half the stuff he tries doesn’t even work. I have a lot of sympathy for demos going wrong, but this really is somewhat of a comedy of errors on so many levels. On the plus side, the whole talk looks and feels a lot more relevant given how abysmal Macromedia’s talk was yesterday. So here’s a tip for future speakers, make sure that the previous session the users go to really, really sucks. That way you can fling poo at the poor little bastards and they’ll still feel mildly grateful.
Moral of the story? Don’t buy Oracle, they’re just a wannabe IBM. If you must buy Oracle, you can do penance by sticking any JDeveloper CD’s you can find in as many microwaves as you can find.
March 4th, 2005 at 5:25 pm
EJB sucks
March 4th, 2005 at 5:38 pm
Why am I not surprised to read Rod’s comment. I don’t think he can say anything but this contrite, oversimplified drivle that he has been spouting for the last few years.
March 4th, 2005 at 7:42 pm
You fell for that?
March 5th, 2005 at 9:40 am
Rod said i could say something (he doesn’t let me speak without interuption very often), so fuck you all. Rod, back to you.
March 5th, 2005 at 1:11 pm
The component based UI design is the right idea. JSF may have bloated it up – but it is still the right idea. Developers can’t design UIs worth Shit but they don’t have to design the UI – the UI designers can design mock ups using whatever tool they like – the developers merely copy the design into a rich component based development. The UI design just like the business requirements are fed to the developers who make it work. A component based design is the cleanest approach for a developer. Now we just need someone to get it right – so that the developers are not seeing ugly HTML crap and creating HTML crap but rather they are assembling (either visually or coded) pre-built components and attaching events etc.
March 5th, 2005 at 9:51 pm
Why not hiring a web developer at epix? You said open sores again. Bzzzzz…
March 6th, 2005 at 10:49 am
Man… How I wanted to be in the oracle presentation… I’m being forced to work with their JDev shit and would love to plug something on their holes
March 7th, 2005 at 2:06 am
Yoda .. my sympathies man. Oracle, as a company, really really sucks with its products. I think DB is the only decent product they can ever have. And Jdev sucks bigtime.
Keep up the good work Hani.
March 7th, 2005 at 7:50 am
>A good point raised by the speaker also is the >difference between how audiences receive open sores >crap vs vendor solution crap.
Hani – simply most of the people is sharing your opinions regarding ibm, oracle, jboss and other “vendors” :). but I don’t really get it also how somebody can believe that something must be better only becouse it is open source.
Michal
March 7th, 2005 at 8:46 am
and what is wrong with JDev?
Just practically? We are not forced to use JSF from Oracle, so maybe there is something bad in the IDE itself we do not know?
April 22nd, 2006 at 6:43 pm
>but I don’t really get it also how somebody can believe that something must be better only becouse it is open source
Maybe not – but who is saying that (besides you, pillowmunch) ?
Add ‘Ceteris paribus’ to the equation and it is, bee-yatch.
To wit:
no license costs,
code (if you can handle it),
and no ‘tech support’ barrier ! ‘
(D’oh – no CYA there, I guess ‘big vendor’ *is* the way to go. That and protesting the inevitable.)
Applicability, maintenance & glue is always your dime, regardless. Byatch.
But by all means buy that ‘i paid money so its better, right?’ insurance. Darwin might be wrong.
“A fool and his money… “. (or francs – i mean euros – my bad, ya cheese eating surrender-monkey)