[nylug-talk] Why does "enterprise" imply "Java"?

[alex@pilosoft.com]

On Fri, 7 Jul 2006, Ajai Khattri wrote:

> This is an interesting discussion all the same. RoR 1.0 was released
> last December so its still new and J2EE has a long headstart so yeah it
> has some way to go (I personally just find Ruby more concise than Java
> for OOP).
RoR is overhyped. In fact, Perl has a dozen frameworks like RoR (like 
Mason) - just nothing quite that polished and clean. Thing is, Ruby is 
just another script language like perl or python - I could learn it in a 
day, but the question is, *WHY*.

Also, just like any framework, RoR pushes you to use its abstractions.  
Personally, I *hate* the activerecord/hibernate/DBIx::RecordSet or any
other similar kind of interface. It is not a substitute to knowing and
writing proper SQL, and results in ridiculous queries to database. In
fact, I would say that anything built based on any ORM framework is not
enterprisy by definition. Just because you can avoid writing SQL by
employing an abstraction doesn't mean the end result is going to be any
good. Of course, the "right answer" (if you really do not want to put SQL
into your application) is what we've been using for 10 years before -
middleware that handles mapping between object-oriented world and 
database. (i.e. fetch_foo() and save_foo())

 > > Also your earlier point:
> 
> "Comparing some of those languages to java is possible such as PHP | RoR 
> vs Java Servlets + lets say Hibernate (or Spirng),"
> 
> is well noted.
> 
> I did come across an article that did some comparison between Hibernate 
> and ActiveRecord 
> (http://www.theserverside.com/tt/articles/article.tss?l=RailsHibernate 
> if anyone's interested) and seems to me that the API level is where you 
> can make *some* (not all) valid comparisons but the maturity differences 
> make this tricky at best.
> 
> 
> 
>