Re: [JBoss-dev] Waaaaaaaaooooooooouuuuwwwwwwww

[Yannick M. <yme...@ya...>]

Oh, I *did* fail to notice the awards were based on user votes, now I 
understand much better.... Well, anyway that's a good point ( the back 
to work, that is ), I'll follow that thought :)

Jason Dillon wrote:

> Isn't "THE BEST" determined in this case by user votes... so it is 
> always going to be scewed twords the varing oppion of the subset of 
> actual users of the product who took the time to vote, and more so by 
> the people who registered the product for voting in the first place.
>
> "THE BEST" has different meaning to different people who have 
> different needs and different design goals.  There is never going to 
> be a product labled "THE BEST" which will fit neatly into each 
> possible usage.  It is a genaral term which shows that out of the 
> voting polutation, they believe that out of the candidates, JBoss is 
> "THE BEST".
>
> People will have to use the product to really understand and evaluate 
> how it fits their needs.  Anyone who is going about designing a 
> product based soly on "THE BEST" of any category without taking into 
> account their needs and requirements is already on the road to failure.
>
> Lets get on with life, get back to work and stop this annoying thread.
>
> --jason
>
>
> Yannick Menager wrote:
>
>>  Yes, of course it depends it the company's requirement, and also on 
>> the design of the system. If the whole architecture is screwed up, no 
>> matter how good the application server is, it won't cut it. And off 
>> course JBoss has a major price advantage ( My own company's servers 
>> are running on JBoss 2.4.4 on linux, and I'm the one who put them 
>> there, but my company's requirements are not the same my company's 
>> customers... ). The problem is that from what I got from the whole 
>> article, is that it doesn't just say JBoss is a very good app server, 
>> it says it's THE BEST .... I quote '
>> Though a free offering, JBoss quashes the old adage that "you get 
>> what you pay for.
>>
>> to me IMO that sounds like saying that JBoss can do everything all 
>> the other app servers can do, which is not the case, and not just 
>> talking of the clustering capacities, for example
>> Certificate based authentication for the web server doesn't seem to 
>> work as far as I could find. Maybe that is not the message that was 
>> being attempted to be sent, but I believe that's the message the 
>> whole thing sent through. Like I mentioned in the other email, it's a 
>> question of expectations. and that kind of award bumps up ALOT 
>> people's expectation alot. And when it comes to this kind of 
>> products, you don't get many chances to win people's hearts. If you 
>> burn them once, you probably won't manage to ever convince them to 
>> even bother trying again. If that award had been for 3.0, It would 
>> have been quite ok, but 2.4 ..... erm...
>>
>>
>> Luke Taylor wrote:
>>
>>> Yannick Menager wrote:
>>> >
>>> ...
>>>
>>>> But saying that JBoss can do everything a commercial appserver like 
>>>> wls, is to raise expectations in such a way that it can actually 
>>>> harm JBoss.... If some people have high requirements in terms of 
>>>> scalability and fault tolerance, and decide to use JBoss after 
>>>> seeing this article, they'll run in big trouble when they find out 
>>>> the differences. 
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I disagree here too. In my experince many clients find out exactly 
>>> the opposite - that they've been sold a huge capacity, 
>>> "dual-clustered-weblogic-on-sun-E999999-boxes-with-replicated-oracle-db 
>>> " setup for a system that could be run on a single decent specced 
>>> box running open source server software for a *miniscule* fraction 
>>> of the price, usually because of the vested interests/commission of 
>>> the software companies they were dealing with.
>>>
>>> Nobody should deploy on anything unless they've done realistic tests 
>>> of the system with a realisitic simulation of the expected load. 
>>> They should evaluate JBoss the same as any other server - if it fits 
>>> their needs then they save a packet.
>>>
>>> Luke.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _________________________________________________________
>> Do You Yahoo!?
>> Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Jboss-development mailing list
>> Jbo...@li...
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Jboss-development mailing list
> Jbo...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
>