Please see comments below :).
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Leonardo Quijano Vincenzi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2005 12:01 PM
> To: Tapestry users
> Subject: Re: tapestry to JSF conversion
>
> Well actually you can download Java and buy MyEclipse for $30.
>
> Now you actually have a point... but the problem is, what happens when
> it just doesn't work? When you pop in the .NET CDs, start developing,
> and notice you don't have good internationalization, that your pages
> suck at web standards (yeah, those BGCOLOR properties in Visual Studio
> are just *great*!) and that if you want a little bit from the "way they
> do it" (i'm not saying "the right way to do it" because it's NOT the
> right way!) you can't do nothing. Ahh... if you want to see the source
> code because the documentation's lacking ?
I agree about 80% with what you have to say; I find programming in
.net to be sort of like using public transport. It gets me 80% of the way
there very efficiently, but then I'm ****** and have to walk the last half
mile through the rain. .NET definitely has a ".net" way of doing things and
god help you if you want to stray from the path.
If you're willing to live within those restrictions though, it
works. I've yet to run into something I flat *couldn't* do with .net. It was
usually more that I couldn't do it the way I wanted to do it and the .net
way was very microsofty and weird. That's a question of taste through rather
than functionality in my book.
Also, (and I can't vouch for this personally because I was never a
VB jockey), my suspicion is that a lot of the .NETism that you and I think
are just f-ing wonkers, and probably familiar VB paradigms that make perfect
sense to folks who have a MS background.
>
> What I value most of the Java community is your chance to actually make
> a difference in what you need and what's the best way of doing things
> (well in almost every project but the dictatorial-managed-Hibernate
> one). It's the "open source" part what I like the most - not quite the
> technology, which I find lacking in some areas.
I enjoy that as well, but I can't claim it's a business reason to
recommend an OS stack. "Hey boss, can we use java and tapestry instead of
.net because I'll get a kick out of working on tapestry and, who knows, I
might be able to contribute some code back to the commuity."
"It'll let me develop faster" is a business case.
"It'll let me develop less buggy code" is a business case.
"It's backed by the world's largest software company and we'll
always have somebody to call if it breaks" is a business case.
"It'll run 3X as fast" may, or may not, be a business case.
"I like playing with open source" is not, unfortunately, a business
case :).
--- Pat
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
