Transcript Requirements flow down serves a purpose

Positioning J2EE and .NET
Including JBoss and Mono
Pierre Fricke, EVP, Web Application and PLM
Infrastructure; [email protected]
Copyright © 2001 D.H. Brown Associates, Inc.
1
DHBA Web Application and PLM
Infrastructure Services
 Application Platform – J2EE and .NET
 Integration Platform – EAI, Web Services, PLM




EAI vs. App Server Integration Platforms Study
Web Services in PLM Study
J2EE and .NET Platform Positioning
IT and ISV Decision Making Services
 DHBA also has a major focus on Linux and OSS…
Copyright © 2001 D.H. Brown Associates, Inc.
2
Issue: Choosing an Application Platform
 Operating systems are no longer the “application
platform” for modern applications
 Two component models: The Java platform and
Microsoft .NET
 Most large companies will support both – decision
becomes a project, process or functional area focus
 Smaller companies will be driven by solution
providers
 Existing infrastructure and skills should be the
biggest drivers of the decision with an eye to
business benefits – speed, integration and agility
Copyright © 2001 D.H. Brown Associates, Inc.
3
The Java Platform
Client-Side
Presentation
Server-Side
Presentation
Server-Side
Business Logic
Web
Container
EJB
Container
Pure
HTML
JSP
EJB
Java
Applet
JSP
EJB
Browser
Apache;
Others
Entity,
Message,
Session
Desktop
J2SE
Application
JDBC
Enterprise
Information
System
Java
Servlet
EJB
J2EE
Platform
J2EE
Platform
Other Device
J2ME
Client
Copyright © 2001 D.H. Brown Associates, Inc.
4
The Java Platform
BluePrints
Servlets
Container
Transactions
Messaging
Connectors
JSPs
EJBs
Applets
JavaBeans
Tools
Mail
Java 2 SDK, Standard Edition
CORBA
Security
Database
Directory
XML
Copyright © 2001 D.H. Brown Associates, Inc.
5
The Microsoft .NET Platform
Client-Side
Presentation
Browser
Server-Side
Presentation
Server-Side
Business Logic
Enterprise
Information
System
ADO .NET
IIS
Pure
HTML
ASP.NET
Managed
Objects
.NET
Experience
ASP.NET
Managed
Objects
ASP.NET
Managed
Objects
Desktop
.NET
Experience
Other Device
.NET
Experience
CLR
CLR
Copyright © 2001 D.H. Brown Associates, Inc.
6
.NET Framework
C#
MC++
VB
JScript
System.Web (ASP.NET)
Session State
UI
Caching
Security
Configuration
System.WinForms
Component Model
Design
HTML Controls
Web Controls
System.Drawing
Simple Web Services
Protocols
Discovery
Description
Drawing 2D
Printing
Imaging
Text
System.Data (ADO .NET)
ADO
Other
System.XML
Serialization
Design
SQL
Other
Collections
Configuration
IO
Net
Security
Configuration
UI
Interop Services
Diagnostics
Reflection
Text
Remoting
Globalization
Resources
Threading
Serialization
XSLT
XPath
System
Common Language Runtime
GC
MSIL
JIT
App Domain Loader
Verifier
Globalization Type System
Class Loader
COM+
Active Directory
IIS+
Networking
Windows
MSMQ
Hardware Drivers
File SystemCopyright © 2001 D.H. Brown Associates, Inc.
7
J2EE and Microsoft .NET Positioning
– “Centers of Gravity” Market Positions of Strength High Value &
Function
J2EE
J2EE
.NET
.NET
.NET
.NET
High Volume/
Low Price
Small/Medium Biz
Ind. Depts. In Large
J2EE
Net Generation .com
clicks and bricks
Enterprises
Copyright © 2001 D.H. Brown Associates, Inc.
Four Critical Tradeoffs
 Platform choice

Many vs. Windows
 Language choice

Java vs. Many
 ebXML

E-business collaboration standards vs. BizTalk
 Plugability and choice

Best-of-breed vs. Integrated stack
Copyright © 2001 D.H. Brown Associates, Inc.
9
Platform Tradeoffs
 J2EE – Windows, Linux, UNIXes, OS/400, z/OS,
etc…



Deploy new applications on existing infrastructure
Maximize use of existing hardware and OS admin skill
mix
Application QoS differentiation with UNIXes and z/OS
 .NET – Windows



Deploy new applications on newer Intel infrastructure
with Windows 2000 and .NET Server
Focus skills towards Windows platform
Leverage existing infrastructure through web services
 If new applications to be deployed on non-Windows
– use J2EE
Copyright © 2001 D.H. Brown Associates, Inc.
10
Language Tradeoffs
 J2EE – Java



Focus on new OO and component paradigm – leave bad
habits behind
Java skills and/or training required
Application or component should be primarily Java – JNI and
Corba bridges not optimal for performance nor simplicity
 .NET – C#, Visual Basic, C++, COBOL, etc…



Leverage existing programming skills – some retraining is
required for .NET Managed Components
Older code can be ported
Non-OO programmers need OO/component programming
training and discipline for max benefit
 If Java skills are scarce or not readily available – use .NET
Copyright © 2001 D.H. Brown Associates, Inc.
11
ebXML – Standardized e-Business
Process
Definition
Process
Definition
Process
Evolution
Process
Management
Electronic
Business
Collaboration
Process
Execution
Partner
Sign-Up
Electronic
Plug-In
• Interoperability in J2EE 1.4 - JAXM
Copyright © 2001 D.H. Brown Associates, Inc.
12
Plugability and Choice
 J2EE offers several competing application
frameworks – BEA WL Platform; IBM WebSphere;
JBoss; Oracle 9i; Sun ONE; others…

Some J2EE-based offerings/extensions run on multiple
platforms – e.g., there are other portals available on
WebSphere beyond just IBM’s; Novell’s eXtend; BEA
WL Server is part of Sun ONE via partnership; etc…
 Microsoft offers a highly integrated model – with an
ongoing strategy of including more in the base OS.


Greater seamless integration between offerings
Less choice
Copyright © 2001 D.H. Brown Associates, Inc.
13
More:







J2EE
vs.
Multi-platform/vendor
Java, CORBA bridges
SOAP-based + ebXML
Multiple IDEs
Varied BPM- WSFL,BTP
More complex
Richer functionality



CMP, BMP
Entity and Msg Beans
Transaction and availability
 Choice




Microsoft .NET







Single platform/vendor
Multi-lingual (…C#)
SOAP-based
Visual Studio .NET
BizTalk and XLANG
Simpler
High volume focus


Visual Basic, etc… link
Desktop link
 Integrated SW stack
Pluggable architecture
Multiple application
frameworks: Sun ONE, IBM eBiz, Oracle 9i, BEA WL
Platform
OSS – JBoss
Interoperate through web
services, JCA, JMS, COM
bridges, CORBA





MS sole provider of framework
pieces
Common look and feel
Simplified deployment
OSS – Mono?
Interoperate through web
services
Copyright © 2001 D.H. Brown Associates, Inc.
14
WebSphere Studio vs. VS .NET
 IBM WebSphere Studio




Based on open-source Eclipse
Application portability – eServers, Windows, Linux, …
Portal development – Studio Page Designer
Support of Apache Tomcat and web services
 Microsoft Visual Studio .NET



Focus and integrated with Windows
Greater language flexibility
Easy development lifecycle management
 Visual Modeler; Common Dev Environments across all tools;
Intellisense code checking; Visual debugging across languages;
Deployment wizards; Load testing; Analyzer for distributed application
performance
 Enterprise skills are needed for complex applications
regardless of choice!
Copyright © 2001 D.H. Brown Associates, Inc.
15
Migration and Maturity
 J2EE

Migration





None – requires rewrite
Best for new workloads
Can use web services to incorporate legacy IT assets
Also Corba and JNI bridges
Maturity – a few years
 Some parts new – web services, portal, JCA 1.5
 .NET

Migration





COM/COM+ supported in .NET as non-Managed Object
Requires some rewrite/update to incorporate as Manage Obj.
Risk of migrating procedural “bad habits”
Web services
Maturity – less than 1 year;
 some parts more than 1 Year – ADO, OS, COM+
Copyright © 2001 D.H. Brown Associates, Inc.
16
Presentation and Rich Clients
 The Java Platform


J2SE – not “dead” – useful, but not widely visible
J2ME – gaining lots of traction
 Consistency across pervasive devices and portability
 Upwardly scalable to J2SE and EE


Portlets – JSR 168
IBM’s WSXL – web services experience language
 Microsoft .NET Experiences




High value user environments that improve productivity
.NET My Services – repositioned
Design and PLM collaboration
Kinko’s remote printing
 .NET Compact Framework; Mobile Internet Toolkit and
Pocket PC SDK
Copyright © 2001 D.H. Brown Associates, Inc.
17
Server-side Capabilities
 J2EE






Session Beans (Stateful and Stateless)
Entity Beans and CMP / BMP
Message Driven Beans
Transaction differentiation – nested and optimistic
transactions, CORBA
Clustering – z/OS Sysplex, data dependent routing for
app partitioning, integration with network hardware
Liberty; Proprietary security models
 .NET



ADO.NET
.NET Queued components
My Services .NET / Passport
 J2EE richer, .NET simpler
Copyright © 2001 D.H. Brown Associates, Inc.
18
Performance
 IT should not decide based on “industry”
benchmarks




Current J2EE vs .NET comparisons are embryonic
Not representative of user scenarios
All vendors can claim leadership in some configuration
or against some defined scenario
Architect and developer skills *much* more important
 That being said, .NET appears to have some
potential inherent advantages

Method JIT granularity
 J2EE has advantages of UNIX, AS/400 and S/390
when applicable
Copyright © 2001 D.H. Brown Associates, Inc.
19
Acquisition Costs





J2EE offers the lowest acquisition cost with JBoss on Linux. Sun’s new
LX 50 Intel server with Sun Linux and the Sun ONE J2EE server is
competitive with Microsoft .NET on Dell hardware on a value-offered
basis. Additionally, some midrange Solaris 9 configurations are
competitively priced with Microsoft .NET on a value basis.
Microsoft .NET is a price leader when excluding open source J2EE and
Linux and Sun Linux.
Java servlet platforms can be price competitive with .NET.
The J2EE leaders, BEA WebLogic Server and IBM WebSphere Advanced
Edition, are considerably more expensive than Microsoft .NET on typical
business logic tier midrange four-way systems. However, they offer
greater proven enterprise application server capability and more maturity
than Microsoft .NET Server or Windows 2000 Server with the .NET
platform.
Acquisition prices converge at the higher end (eight-way systems) with
the J2EE and .NET differences less than 10%.
Copyright © 2001 D.H. Brown Associates, Inc.
20
Pricing and Packaging
Type of System
J2EE
.NET
Departmental (2-way)
$4.5K-$6.9K
$5.1K-$7.6K
Mid-level application (4-way)
PDM, Collab, etc..
$55K-$81K
$48K
$189K
$173K
Enterprise ERP (8-way)
Copyright © 2001 D.H. Brown Associates, Inc.
21
Interoperability – Web Services ++
ebXML, RosettaNet, UBL
X
M
L
BTP (ebXML),
WSCI, BPEL, WS-T –C
WSDL
UDDI
ebXML
SOAP, XML-RPC, ebXML..
HTTP, FTP, SMTP...
TCP/IP
Web Services Standards in Process
 Business Process/Documents
 Transactions and Choreography
 Description and Discovery
 Messaging
 Transport
 Internet
Web Services Standards in Place
Copyright © 2001 D.H. Brown Associates, Inc.
22
J2EE and Linux
 Most J2EE costs > W2K/COM+ / .NET Server
 J2EE OSes  Solaris, Windows 2K, others
 Linux offers J2EE opportunity


High volume on Intel HW; attractive to developers and
potentially ISVs
J2EE + Linux may be less expensive than .NET Server
(acquisition costs; solution pre-req cost)
 IBM and BEA Strategy; Sun Strategy
 The field is wide open for a significant shift in leadership wrt
component frameworks; Microsoft’s new component model
and licensing may open door even wider
 JBoss – Wildcard which is gaining some traction

WebMethods, early adopter enterprises, developers
Copyright © 2001 D.H. Brown Associates, Inc.
23
JBoss Opportunity
A popular development platform
>150,000 downloads/month
 A leading application server in development

 JBOSS: 42%, BEA 28%, Source: JBoss and Togethersoft

Features done by developers for developers
 Hot deploy of apps/services/server
 Simpler approach to packaging/deployment/compilation
Stability
Free – ISV prereq opportunity, e.g., webMethods
JBoss won “Best App Server” from JavaWorld in
2002
Is JBoss the next Linux?
Copyright © 2001 D.H. Brown Associates, Inc.
24
More on JBoss
 To be added
Copyright © 2001 D.H. Brown Associates, Inc.
25
Open Source .NET - Mono
 Is an OSS implementation of the Microsoft .NET
 Common Language Infrastructure (CLI)
 Multi-lingual class library
 C# compiler
 Runtime will support .NET web services
 “Soup” allows for web service creation and
interoperbility
 Long-term project and effects on standardization
 Depends on ubiquity…e.g., does Mono get widely
deployed on Linux or does J2EE win out?
Copyright © 2001 D.H. Brown Associates, Inc.
26
More on Mono
 To be added
Copyright © 2001 D.H. Brown Associates, Inc.
27
Issues for J2EE Vendors





Improve development environment productivity to be more competitive
with Visual Studio .NET. Specifically, simplify the programming model
where possible.
Improve price competitiveness with Windows 2000 through .NET. JBoss
is not supported by a large vendor. Sun SPARC hardware remains
expensive. BEA WebLogic and WebSphere EJB containers are very
expensive. Sun Linux on its new Intel-based LX 50 is a good start.
With the above issues improved, capture as many new developers as
possible by leveraging Linux and Apache.
Complete the process of incorporating web services into the J2EE
standard and add value by incorporating more of ebXML, particularly the
higher level business collaboration standards.
Develop a strategy to ensure a heterogeneous client tier while simplifying
the programming model – J2ME, J2SE, and embedded Linux efforts are
fragmented and at medium to long term risk due to the added value being
built into .NET at this level.
Copyright © 2001 D.H. Brown Associates, Inc.
28
Issues for Microsoft





Ensure a robust and high-quality .NET Server release while maintaining
the current schedule.
Improve user perception of Microsoft forward compatibility in the future
from .NET V1 to V2+.
Demonstrate large scale, enterprise customer success stories with .NET
on par with high-end UNIX and J2EE.
Either preempt ebXML standards at the higher levels with BizTalk and
new web services standards or embrace ebXML. This must be done and
delivered over the next 12-18 months requiring significant vendor
agreement across complex issues. The new business process and
transaction web services specifications are a step towards a standardized
business collaboration framework.
Ensure both the technical (COM-to-.NET migration) and the license fee
migration from NT and 2000 are as simple as possible and competitive
for value offered against Apache Java and XML and J2EE on Linux.
Copyright © 2001 D.H. Brown Associates, Inc.
29