|
From: Mark S. <ms...@nn...> - 2004-12-24 16:02:58
|
I'd just finished reading through this discussion and thought I would post the link to this list when this message from Knut came through. There is some good content in this discussion thread (along with the usual noise of Slashdot). I found this comment particularly interesting: ---- from Slashdot---- > if your application needs to be platform > independent, J2EE is the obvious choice. If you > want the easiest and most productive development > environment, stick with .NET. I'd agree with that, with the caveat that I don't have quite the same level of expertise with J2EE that I do with .NET. On the other hand, surely you're considering making some/most/all of your apps browser-based. If so, why not go with the following approach: - build back-end with J2EE or .NET (your preference; generally most places won't care which you use for back end systems, as they'll have experience supporting each these days) - expose all your functionality via Web services - build your UI stuff in XUL so it can be driven by any Mozilla-based browser Why use XUL? The following reasons: - Mozilla browsers run on just about any platform, so your client-side portability issues disappear - no client deployment. Particularly important if you face having to make customer-specific changes to your UI - powerful user interface; most of the useful UI widgets are in XUL, so you can build an interface that users will like - Firefox is taking a sizeable chunk out of IE's market on Windows, and is now getting recommendations from the sources that IT decision makers tend to respect - it's easy to code test cases that require user interaction in XUL, so a lot of your initial testing can be done while you build up XUL expertise - there's no real lock in; if your customer absolutely requires that a Mozilla browser can't be installed, the effort involved in putting together an identical user interface that works client-server (using e.g. VB.NET or Delphi) is very low once you've got a solid working GUI up and going in XUL. To be honest, that goes for just about any application; migrating your GUI from one toolset to another is very fast, *except* when you have to migrate to a regular HTML GUI such as IE Downsides of XUL - no really good IDE at present. There's a few good looking works in progress, but that's about it. An IDE along the lines of VS.NET or Delphi for XUL would be a huge step forward at this point - documentation exists and is quite comprehensive, but high quality tutorial-level stuff in particular can be tough to find. Plenty of good reference material though; either online or in books ---------end of Slashdot comment --------- /Mark Knut Staring wrote: > Hello everybody, > > There's a fairly extensive discussion on technologies for health care > systems on Slashdot today (mainly on .Net vs. Java). > > Being an open discussion forum for geeks, there's quite a lot of > noise, and it seems somewhat US-centric. > > Still, I found several of the subdiscussions to be of interest. > You can find a somewhat noise-filtered version here: > http://ask.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=133829&threshold=2&mode=thread&commentsort=0&op=Change > > The whole discussion can be found here: > http://ask.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/12/23/2144208&tid=156 > > God Jul (Merry Yuletide) to all! > > Knut > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide > Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. > Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. > http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/ > _______________________________________________ > Jdhis-developers mailing list > Jdh...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jdhis-developers > > -- Mark H. Spohr, MD ms...@nn... +1-530-583-3097 |