YOUR FEEDBACK
Brian Vicente wrote: Where are listing 3 and listing 4?


2008 East
DIAMOND SPONSOR:
Data Direct
Frontiers in Data Access: The Coming Wave in Data Services
PLATINUM SPONSORS:
Red Hat
The Opening of Virtualization
Intel
Virtualization – Path to Predictive Enterprise
Green Hills
IT Security in a Hostile World
JBoss / freedom oss
Practical SOA Approach
GOLD SPONSORS:
Software AG
The Art & Science of SOA: How Governance Enables Adoption
PlateSpin
Effective Planning for Virtual Infrastructure Growth
Fujitsu
Automated Business Process Discovery & Virtualization Service
Ceedo
Workspace Virtualization
Click For 2007 West
Event Webcasts

2008 East
PLATINUM SPONSORS:
Appcelerator
Think Fast: Accelerate AJAX Development with Appcelerator
GOLD SPONSORS:
DreamFace Interactive
The Ultimate Framework for Creating Personalized Web 2.0 Mashups
ICEsoft
AJAX and Social Computing for the Enterprise
Kaazing
Enterprise Comet: Real–Time, Real–Time, or Real–Time Web 2.0?
Nexaweb
Now Playing: Desktop Apps in the Browser!
Sun
jMaki as an AJAX Mashup Framework
POWER PANELS:
The Business Value
of RIAs
What Lies Beyond AJAX?
KEYNOTES:
Douglas Crockford
Can We Fix the Web?
Anthony Franco
2008: The Year of the RIA
Click For 2007 Event Webcasts
SYS-CON.TV
TOP THREE LINKS YOU MUST CLICK ON


Java or .NET? XML Rich-Client AJAX Technology Brings Zero-Install Rich Client To Java
Which platform to use Java or .NET? Developers ask this question all the time

This article originally appeard in Java Developer's Journal on October 10, 2005

Which platform to use Java or .NET? Developers ask this question all the time. Java has been widely adopted because of its overwhelming benefits on the server side, but Java has less to offer on the client side. .NET has made inroads into the enterprise by leveraging its stronger rich-client capabilities. An alternative solution for enterprise-scale Internet application development is the emerging XML-based rich-client technology.

.NET Erosion from the Client Side
There are good reasons why Java is the platform of choice for server-side computing. J2EE is an open standards-based platform that enables open integration. Java enjoys broad industry support, including vendors like IBM, Sun, and Oracle, as well as upstarts like Nexaweb and Sonic Software. J2EE is cross-platform, giving customers the freedom to deploy in different environments. It has proven enterprise strength. By comparison, .NET has obvious limitations. It is limited to Windows deployment only; it's a single-vendor solution, and lacks industry support from other vendors to meet enterprise requirements.

On the other hand, .NET has stronger client-side capabilities than Java. Java AWT is based on an architecture that offers limited out-of-box capabilities. Java Swing offers better out-of-box functionality, but it's complex and difficult to use. It is possible to develop Java applications with a rich look-and-feel using AWT or Swing, but complexity and developer skills requirements are high. By contrast, the barriers to developing strong .NET client applications are lower. Your typical corporate developer can easily write sophisticated VB.NET desktop applications with a professional look-and-feel.


Watch Coach Wei, author of this article, live on SYS-CON.TV

Another option is to develop thin-client applications using HTML. HTML applications are "zero-install" thin-client applications, while both Java and .NET client apps have a heavy client-side footprint and require a significant download. Besides solving network bandwidth issues, "zero-install" translates directly into lower maintenance and support costs. The skill set requirements and complexity of HTML is much lower than either .NET and Java. Unfortunately, HTML isn't suitable for handling the level of complexity, scale, and time-sensitivity required by enterprise programs. For applications with non-linear workflow, complex integration, large data sets, or time criticality, Java or .NET rich clients have been the only viable options.

Most business applications are user-oriented. Client-side issues such as look-and-feel, richness, and performance directly impact business user productivity. As a result, client-side choice can influence server-side architecture decisions. Because Java doesn't have a compelling solution on the client side, many applications are written with .NET. Eventually this could lead to a greater adoption of .NET for easier integration and management, eventually eroding J2EE's market share.

XML Rich Client
Now there's an alternative. XML rich client-technology serves rich-client applications on-demand by using XML from J2EE or Service Oriented Architecture (SOA) environments. Using XML rich-client technology, J2EE can deliver enterprise Java applications with higher performance than .NET - not only visually and functionally richer, but easier to deploy and maintain, with a thinner footprint, faster performance, greater scalability, and lower complexity.

Sample XML-Based Rich Client Technology Code
With XML rich-client technology, Web developers can build and deploy Web applications with the same richness and performance as the best Java Swing or .NET client apps without losing the "zero-install" and "universal delivery" advantages of HTML. The difference is that an XML-based rich-client application would send out XML to the client side, which is processed by the software's client, instead of HTML being processed by a browser, as in a normal Web application.

Figure 1 shows a sample form. The code behind it is as follows:

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<dialog height="212" title="Sample Form" width="275">
   <layoutmanager layout="nulllayout"/>
   <tabbox borderstyle="null" height="168" width="248" x="8" y="8">
    <tab text="tabPage1">
    <panel>
     <layoutmanager layout="nulllayout"/>
     <label height="23" text="Please Enter Your Card Number Below:"
     width="224" x="6" y="24"/>
     <textbox height="20" text="" width="216" x="8" y="48"/>
     <button height="25" text="OK" width="60" x="170" y="100"/>
     </panel>
    </tab>
    <tab text="tabPage2"/>
   </tabbox>
</dialog>

Figure 2 shows a sample chart. In normal Web apps, such charts are generated as static GIF images that are sent to the browser for display. With XML-based rich-client technology, XML can be sent directly to the client:

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<dialog title="Auto-resizable Chart Example" bordercolor="blue" width="534"
height="325">
   <layoutmanager layout="borderlayout"/>
   <chart layoutpos="center">
    <content>
    <series points="200,100,400,300,200,200,100,400,300,200" stroke="red"
    type="line"/>
    <series points="300,200,100,200,400,300,200,100,200,400"     stroke="blue"
    type="line"/>
    </content>
    <valueaxis/>
    <labelaxis fgcolor="red"/>
    <legend/>
   </chart>
</dialog>

The Benefits of XML Rich Client Technology

  • The Future is XML - The rapid adoption of XML for server-side computing makes XML a natural candidate for client-side computing. Even Microsoft has made a commitment to this trend. The next-generation Windows, Longhorn, will support the use of XML for Windows desktop applications.
  • XML Rich-Client Technology Significantly Lowers Application Complexity and Skill Set Requirements - One benefit of XML rich-client technology is that it enables enterprise-class Internet applications while lowering development/maintenance complexity. XML rich-client technology uses the power of XML, which is more efficient and extensible than procedural programming languages like Java, C#, C++, or JavaScript. Code created in XML is simpler, takes up fewer lines, and is easier to read and process. Someone with HTML skills can easily understand the code, while C# code and Java Swing code require intimate knowledge of Object-Oriented programming.

About Coach Wei
Coach Wei is the Founder and Chairman of Nexaweb (www.nexaweb.com), developers of the leading software platform for building and deploying Web 2.0 and AJAX applications. Previously, he played a key role at EMC Corporation in the development of a new generation of storage network management software. Wei has his master's degree from MIT, holds several patents, is the author of several technology publications including JDJ, Web 2.0 Journal, and AJAXWorld Magazine, and is an industry advocate for the proliferation of open standards.

YOUR FEEDBACK
Sim LIms wrote: Nice try, but I am sorry its too late for Java. Microsoft has already a more matured technology offering, XAML.
Sim LIms wrote: Nice try, but too late for Java. Microsoft has already a more matured technology offering, XAML.
SYS-CON Australia News Desk wrote: Which platform to use Java or .NET? Developers ask this question all the time. Java has been widely adopted because of its overwhelming benefits on the server side, but Java has less to offer on the client side. .NET has made inroads into the enterprise by leveraging its stronger rich-client capabilities. An alternative solution for enterprise-scale Internet application development is the emerging XML-based rich-client technology.
JDJ News Desk wrote: Java or .NET? XML Rich-Client Technology Brings Zero-Install Rich Client To J2EE. Which platform to use Java or .NET? Developers ask this question all the time. Java has been widely adopted because of its overwhelming benefits on the server side, but Java has less to offer on the client side. .NET has made inroads into the enterprise by leveraging its stronger rich-client capabilities. An alternative solution for enterprise-scale Internet application development is the emerging XML-based rich-client technology.
G Austin wrote: i noticed that Nexaweb is being voted for the "Best Java Rich Client Platform" at JDJ - http://jdj.sys-con.com/general/readerschoice.htm.
Mark Grant wrote: While I agree whole-heartedly that an XML solution is the way to go (I worked on a project that did exactly that) I feel that there is a bit too much bias toward the Java language in the article (bashing dotNET with the amount of lines to create a form - and how many to do the same in Swing..?). To me the great advantage of using XML is to abstract the whole UI (in this case) away from the underlying EE implementation. A better way of putting this across would have been to simply explain how XML allows language/framework independent techniques for generating 'rich-client' UI without taking the opportunity to criticize a particular framework.
Rob Dixon wrote: Mr. Alsop, Actually it's been one-way bashing so far, all from you and "David Jackson", since I have focused on the merits of the article and defending myself against your stabs at my credibility. Shall I try to play the same game, "joking" about the "insurance company" you work for, or suggesting you are not really "Jay Alsop" as you claim? Ridiculous. Your recent post highlights my main point once again: thinly-veiled advertisements masquerading as articles, or comments, are really not that useful. Apparently some people enjoy that kind of article, but I do not. I appreciate hearing your opinions about Longhorn's communication layer and how it will "blow me away," but really I have checked it out and I was not impressed. I prefer to work with software that has actually been released, and that doesn't require a MSFT client platform to use. Not everyone uses Windows. By...
Jay Alsop wrote: Yeah, Mr.Dixon, you are right, working for a B2B software company - when did you leave Macromedia? Apparently you are still on Macromedia website (nice photo, you look cool indeed:-)) Joking aside, I don't see the point of bashing at each other, or force-fitting each other into pre-conceived boxes. Frankly, i think the article is well put in its context. I can make the connection well. Mr.Dixon is trying to force fit the article or discusssion into "RIA" box - I don't think the article is necessarily about RIA: In .NET world, you have Avalon presentation foundation, Indigo for messaging, and Longhorn server. The article pointed out something architecturally equavilent in the J2EE world: we need rich client, but also the messaging part and integrated server. RIA as i know today is just about presentation, has no concept of something like Indigo. I really like the three integrate...
Rob Dixon wrote: Mr. Alsop's been doing some detective work. Yes I did work for Macromedia for a while. I have also worked for quite a few other companies, and as an independent consultant, building systems using Java, .NET, Flex, and AJAX technologies, among others. I have no interest in promoting Flex, but I do have an interest in seeing a balanced discussion of RIA technologies. I am currently employed at a B2B software company and we're in the process of exploring various RIA technologies for an upcoming project. That is why I was so disappointed with this article. On the surface it looks like it will cover some new and interesting aspects of RIAs -- maybe something I can use in my current work. Then it turns into a plug for the author's product. So essentially I'm in the same position as Mr. Alsop himself, working with different RIA technologies and evaluating their merits. Now, if Mr. Al...
Jay Alsop wrote: Disclaimer: i work for a big insurance company as a software architect - i have played with various RIA solutions but i am not affiliated with either Nexwaweb or Macromedia of any other RIA software companies. I have been watching this thread for a little while and thought it is funny to see how people attacking each other, and further, figuring out why. Having watched this for a while, I am throwing my own $2c here: 1. Most of the readers get what the arcticle is talking about, however, quite a few of them didn't know where to go from here. This is a deficiency of the article. 2. The attitude here throws me off a little bit. For example, David Jackon say "Rob Dixon" is a shame, and then Tomte says "David Jackson is a shame". -guys, are we all three years old? Now the really interestig part. I googled some of the people here and, look what i found: a>Mr.Ronald Newton, IT Consul...
Rob Dixon wrote: Mr. Jackson must work for Nexaweb too. :) I'd love to see more articles covering Java-based XML-enabled Rich Internet Apps. I build them for a living, using a few different technologies, so I know there's a lot to say about their advantages and disadvantages. However an article like this does a disservice to people who are looking into building such applications. You'd think that Coah Wei's company is the only one doing this stuff, but that's not true. He declined to mention any other sources of information or technology, besides his own company. Contrary to what Mr. Jackson said, I'm looking for something about the forest, but Coach Wei only describes one lone proprietary tree.
tomte wrote: Shame on David Jackson. I agree with Rob Dixon, the whole original article looks like a shameless advertisement to me too. tomte.
David Jackson wrote: This is a fantastic article... Enterprise is at its cross roads - Java or .NET? Microsoft is pushing hard on .NET with a wide variety of actions: Indigo, Windows Vista, Atlas...Java world has been falling behind on some of these areas and is further behind. The industry has to figure out where we are going to: a world dominated by MSFT or something else? Shame on guys like Rob Dixon who only sees a tree and lose sight of a forrest. Let's have more articles like this. Let's have more initiatives like this. Let's welcome more people like Coach Wei...In the end, we will all greatly benefit from these...
Sumanas Bhattacharya wrote: I have tried to run the first code sample given here for XML Rich Client,but I hardly got the desired output. I have used Internet Explorer6.0,FireFox 1.0.4 and opera 8.5,nothing really working. Please inform me how can I get the output of that sample code and and which browser should I use. Please help.
Ronald Newton wrote: Please ignore my last posting. The posting "Coach Wei commented on the 17 Aug 2005" contains all the information I need.
Ronald Newton wrote: Does anyone know how to make the chart sample work with Firefox 1.0.6. When I save the file and attempt to display it, I get: This XML file does not appear to have any style information associated with it. The document tree is shown below. Help
Rob Dixon wrote: I'm sorry but this whole article looks like a shameless advertisement to me. I know Coach Wei plays down his Nexaweb connection in the article to make this seem less obvious. But let's face it, the XML UI examples he gives are based on a proprietary tool only available from his own company. If he were writing a balanced article he would mention and assess some of the other RIA architectures out there, like Macromedia Flex. In fact, his whole RIA platform solution story is the same story that Macromedia has been popularizing for many years now. This isn't the first article written by Coach Wei that includes thinly-veiled references to his own product and no others (see "Why Web Applications Can be Problematic and Unreliable," Dec 2004). It's a shame because there is a lot to say about RIA platforms, covering Macromedia Flex and AJAX and other technologies. Articles like...
Coach Wei wrote: I received a lot of inquiries - email, web posting as well as phone calls. Thank you all for the interest! I will try to answer some general inquires here: 1. "What are the products/technologies available for what you are talking about in this article"? Web browsers today actually have some support for this (Ajax). For enterprise-strength applications where application performance, maintenance and functionality are critical, my company Nexaweb (www.nexaweb.com) provides such a product. It has been deployed at many G2K copmanies supporting large data sets, complex workflow and trasaction volumes, etc. 2. "Where do i go from here?" For people who are interested in playing with the product/technology, take a look at some demo applications at www.nexaweb.com. For people who are interested in having general, public discussions, you are welcome to post comments here or at my b...
David R wrote: I have seldom seen such a light-weight analysis with such poor insight at JDJ - who is editing this content? Just because Google Maps and GMail have become cool with AJAX implementation doesn't mean it is a cure-all for all client development. It is an evolutionary step forward in user web experience. It is complete nonsense to state that XML rendering in a browser is more powerful than Java Swing. (It is more easily deployed perhaps). The XML is rendered by JavaScript working on the Browsers DOM tree. This approach has many shortcomings: - No compile time checking for Javascript running on XML (don't you LOVE those runtime errors?) - No unit test frameworks such as Junit for your code (Can you spell INSTABILITY) - No proper object model for the data rendered by the view(XML is not an object model - there is no behavior, just state) - Complex event management between http requests an...
Omar wrote: to XML News Desk, Yes, XML Rich-Client looks kind of cool... Yes, The examples provided in the article looks cool too... & yes, maybe the using of this technologies is the best approach for Rich-Clients. BUT*** there no names for the technologies used in the article [& I see no intentions to mencione it either] Come on, give us a good starting point!
LATEST JAVA STORIES & POSTS
Unit testing is hard. There I said it. Although I have been developing software for the past 18 years I still find that putting my applications through their paces via unit testing is difficult. I have learned the lesson (I'm sure like many of you) the hard way. Unit testing is p...
Continuent has announced support and enhancements to MySQL Server 5.1.30 GA release, the 5.1 production version of the open source database. MySQL 5.1.30 is recommended for use on production systems by the MySQL build team at Sun Microsystems. Continuent Tungsten provides advance...
As a software journalist, there are times when certain vendors will shut the door on reporting opportunities that might represent too much of an "inside view" of their technology or their organization. I've been to more developer events than I can remember where I've been handed ...
Active Endpoints has announced the general availability of ActiveVOS 6.0.2, in response to ever increasing demands for improved process performance and efficiencies. ActiveVOS is an all-in-one, 100% standards-based orchestration and business process management system (BPM) that p...
Just because the web has been open so far doesn't mean that it will stay that way. Flash and Silverlight, arguably the two market-leading technology toolkits for rich media applications are not open. Make no mistake - Microsoft and Adobe aim to have their proprietary plug-ins, ak...
Doing network I/O on the user interface (UI) thread is bad. Most developers know that and can tell you why; unfortunately, it’s still done. At this year's JavaOne, one of the keynote JavaFX demos bombed because the network was slow, something that would be forgivable had the en...
SUBSCRIBE TO THE WORLD'S MOST POWERFUL NEWSLETTERS
SUBSCRIBE TO OUR RSS FEEDS & GET YOUR SYS-CON NEWS LIVE!
Click to Add our RSS Feeds to the Service of Your Choice:
Google Reader or Homepage Add to My Yahoo! Subscribe with Bloglines Subscribe in NewsGator Online
myFeedster Add to My AOL Subscribe in Rojo Add 'Hugg' to Newsburst from CNET News.com Kinja Digest View Additional SYS-CON Feeds
Publish Your Article! Please send it to editorial(at)sys-con.com!

Advertise on this site! Contact advertising(at)sys-con.com! 201 802-3021


SYS-CON FEATURED WHITEPAPERS

SPONSORED BY INFRAGISTICS
In every field of design one of the first things students do is learn from the work of others. They ...
There are many forces that influence technological evolution. After a decade of building enterprise ...
2008 is going to be an important year for Rich Internet Applications. Most organizations are deliver...
The OpenAjax Alliance is developing an Ajax industry wishlist for future browsers, using a dedicated...
Infragistics announced the availability of two Community Technology Preview (CTP) User Interface (UI...
The YUI development team has released version 2.5.2; you can download the new release from SourceFor...
ADS BY GOOGLE