Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #25071 > unrolled thread

J2EE

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.java.programmer

Contents

  J2EE bob smith <bob@coolfone.comze.com> - 2013-08-20 15:47 -0700
    Re: J2EE Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2013-08-20 16:25 -0700
      Re: J2EE Jukka Lahtinen <jtfjdehf@hotmail.com.invalid> - 2013-08-21 08:40 +0300
        Re: J2EE Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom2@eastlink.ca> - 2013-08-29 08:18 -0300
          Re: J2EE Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-08-29 17:47 -0400
    Re: J2EE Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-08-20 19:26 -0400
    Re: J2EE markspace <markspace@nospam.nospam> - 2013-08-20 17:20 -0700
      Re: J2EE Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-08-20 21:19 -0400
    Re: J2EE lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-08-21 12:08 +0100
    Re: J2EE Gordon Levi <gordon@address.invalid> - 2013-08-22 16:20 +1000
    Re: J2EE Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom2@eastlink.ca> - 2013-08-29 13:26 -0300
      Re: J2EE Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-08-29 17:52 -0400
        Re: J2EE eric@invalid.com (EricF) - 2013-08-30 02:54 +0000
          Re: J2EE Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-08-30 22:49 -0400
            Re: J2EE Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2013-08-31 10:58 +0000
              Re: J2EE Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-08-31 21:39 -0400
                Re: J2EE Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2013-09-01 12:48 +0000
                  Re: J2EE Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-09-01 09:14 -0400
                    Re: J2EE Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2013-09-01 18:35 +0000
                      Re: J2EE Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-09-01 16:45 -0400
                        Re: J2EE Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2013-09-02 00:10 +0000
                          Re: J2EE Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-09-01 20:12 -0400
                            Re: J2EE Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2013-09-02 19:47 +0000
                              Re: J2EE Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-09-02 16:11 -0400
                                Java version check and auro-jre download (was Re: J2EE) Richard Maher <maher_rjSPAMLESS@hotmail.com> - 2013-09-03 06:58 +0800
                                  Re: Java version check and auro-jre download (was Re: J2EE) Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-09-02 19:37 -0400
                                    Re: Java version check and auro-jre download (was Re: J2EE) markspace <markspace@nospam.nospam> - 2013-09-02 20:00 -0700
                                      Re: Java version check and auro-jre download (was Re: J2EE) Richard Maher <maher_rjSPAMLESS@hotmail.com> - 2013-09-03 21:00 +0800
                                        Re: Java version check and auro-jre download (was Re: J2EE) markspace <markspace@nospam.nospam> - 2013-09-03 13:35 -0700
                                          Re: Java version check and auro-jre download (was Re: J2EE) Richard Maher <maher_rjSPAMLESS@hotmail.com> - 2013-09-04 05:14 +0800
                                            Re: Java version check and auro-jre download (was Re: J2EE) markspace <markspace@nospam.nospam> - 2013-09-03 18:34 -0700
                                              Re: Java version check and auro-jre download (was Re: J2EE) Richard Maher <maher_rjSPAMLESS@hotmail.com> - 2013-09-08 19:46 +0800
                                              Re: Java version check and auro-jre download (was Re: J2EE) Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-09-08 20:28 -0400
                                        Re: Java version check and auro-jre download (was Re: J2EE) Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-09-08 20:21 -0400
                                          Re: Java version check and auro-jre download (was Re: J2EE) "John B. Matthews" <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2013-09-09 01:25 -0400
                                            Re: Java version check and auro-jre download (was Re: J2EE) Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2013-09-09 20:19 +0000
                                              Re: Java version check and auro-jre download (was Re: J2EE) Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom2@eastlink.ca> - 2014-01-30 12:43 -0400
                                          Re: Java version check and auro-jre download (was Re: J2EE) Richard Maher <maher_rjSPAMLESS@hotmail.com> - 2013-09-17 19:04 +0800
                  Re: J2EE Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom2@eastlink.ca> - 2013-09-01 17:09 -0300
          Re: J2EE eric@invalid.com (EricF) - 2013-08-31 03:13 +0000
          Re: J2EE Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom2@eastlink.ca> - 2013-08-31 22:46 -0300
    Re: J2EE Wendy Devolder <wendy.devolder@skillsmatter.com> - 2013-09-01 07:44 -0700

Page 1 of 3  [1] 2 3  Next page →

#25071 — J2EE

I see a lot of jobs for J2EE programmers.

Isn't J2SE the free Java whereas J2EE costs a lot?

How do people learn J2EE without paying a lot of money?  Is there really much reason for an Average Joe to take on J2EE?

Thanks.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#25073

bob smith wrote:
> I see a lot of jobs for J2EE programmers.

The official term for the last several years is "Java EE", not "J2EE".

> Isn't J2SE the free Java whereas J2EE costs a lot?

No.

Both are free, and both cost a lot.

> How do people learn J2EE without paying a lot of money? 

By using free implementations.

> Is there really much reason for an Average Joe to take on J2EE?

Are you an "Average Joe"?

A better question is whether the reasons to learn Java EE apply to you.

-- 
Lew

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#25085

Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> writes:
> bob smith wrote:
>> I see a lot of jobs for J2EE programmers.

> The official term for the last several years is "Java EE", not "J2EE".

I just wonder how many more years will it take before the people writing
the job advertisements realize that.. probably until Java EE gets
replaced by yet another term.

-- 
Jukka Lahtinen

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#25167

On 08/21/2013 02:40 AM, Jukka Lahtinen wrote:
> Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> writes:
>> bob smith wrote:
>>> I see a lot of jobs for J2EE programmers.
>
>> The official term for the last several years is "Java EE", not "J2EE".
>
> I just wonder how many more years will it take before the people writing
> the job advertisements realize that.. probably until Java EE gets
> replaced by yet another term.
>
Does it really matter? I still occasionally lapse and call it J2EE 
because I used it for years when it was called that. The people who I 
need to talk to in the course of my work know what I mean if I use the 
older term.

AHS
-- 
When a true genius appears, you can know him by this sign:
that all the dunces are in a confederacy against him.
-- Jonathan Swift

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#25171

On 8/29/2013 7:18 AM, Arved Sandstrom wrote:
> On 08/21/2013 02:40 AM, Jukka Lahtinen wrote:
>> Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> writes:
>>> bob smith wrote:
>>>> I see a lot of jobs for J2EE programmers.
>>
>>> The official term for the last several years is "Java EE", not "J2EE".
>>
>> I just wonder how many more years will it take before the people writing
>> the job advertisements realize that.. probably until Java EE gets
>> replaced by yet another term.
>>
> Does it really matter? I still occasionally lapse and call it J2EE
> because I used it for years when it was called that. The people who I
> need to talk to in the course of my work know what I mean if I use the
> older term.

It is not the biggest issue in the world.

But funky that the name 1999-2006 is used so often over
the name 2006-. It is not a new change.

Arne

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#25074

On 8/20/2013 6:47 PM, bob smith wrote:
> I see a lot of jobs for J2EE programmers.
>
> Isn't J2SE the free Java whereas J2EE costs a lot?

No.

Java SE is the language and the basic libraries.

Java EE is additional libraries and stuff for enterprise usage
including web sites and transactional components.

(J2SE and J2EE acronyms has been replaces)

There are multiple Java SE implementations available (JDK or JRE
depending on how much tools are included). Typical they
are free.

There are also multiple Java EE servers available. Some are free
some cost money.

> How do people learn J2EE without paying a lot of money?

Pick a free server. Or pick a commercial that gives out
free developer license. No problem.

> Is there really much reason for an Average Joe to take on J2EE?

A very large part of Java jobs are within Java EE space - and that
is certainly a reason.

Arne

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#25079

On 8/20/2013 3:47 PM, bob smith wrote:
> I see a lot of jobs for J2EE programmers.
>
> Isn't J2SE the free Java whereas J2EE costs a lot?
>
> How do people learn J2EE without paying a lot of money?  Is there
> really much reason for an Average Joe to take on J2EE?


<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Java_Platform,_Enterprise_Edition>

Big ol' server list about halfway down, most are freebie.

Learning:
Try Head First JSP and Servlets to start, then look at Core JavaServer 
Face 3rd ed. [Horstmann] (Prentice Hall) and Pro JPA 2 [Keith] (Apress). 
  That'll get you warmed up.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#25081

On 8/20/2013 8:20 PM, markspace wrote:
> On 8/20/2013 3:47 PM, bob smith wrote:
>> I see a lot of jobs for J2EE programmers.
>>
>> Isn't J2SE the free Java whereas J2EE costs a lot?
>>
>> How do people learn J2EE without paying a lot of money?  Is there
>> really much reason for an Average Joe to take on J2EE?
>
>
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Java_Platform,_Enterprise_Edition>
>
> Big ol' server list about halfway down, most are freebie.
>
> Learning:
> Try Head First JSP and Servlets to start, then look at Core JavaServer
> Face 3rd ed. [Horstmann] (Prentice Hall) and Pro JPA 2 [Keith] (Apress).
>   That'll get you warmed up.

That should cover the web profile pretty well.

I have Horstmann's book and I can second the recommendation.

Just note that there are also the entire EJB, JCA, JMS, JTA etc. part
of Java EE.

Arne

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#25090

On 20/08/13 23:47, bob smith wrote:
> I see a lot of jobs for J2EE programmers.
>
> Isn't J2SE the free Java whereas J2EE costs a lot?
>
> How do people learn J2EE without paying a lot of money?  Is there really much reason for an Average Joe to take on J2EE?
>
> Thanks.

I think that any additional skill is worthwhile in this day and age.

Start small.

Download Tomcat and write a simple web app with a couple of servlets, 
package it in a war and deploy it. Mess around and add a database, work 
out how to glue it all together.

Get hold of a free J2EE/Java EE app server and deploy your web app

... and here's the point of J2EE

How secure is your app, how scalable, how do you manage your 
transactions, what if you wanted to add messaging etc etc

J2EE is all about delegating responsibility for much of the stuff you 
don't really want to concern yourself with when designing and 
implementing (mainly) business applications.

I would much rather spend time getting my head around the interesting 
bits of the business logic than worrying about the minutiae of securing 
my applications.

One of my commercial sites runs quite happily on standalone Tomcat and 
regularly has 1000 concurrent sessions ... it has never fallen over.

If you are mainly going to be writing for small to medium sized business 
then you may not need a full featured J2EE server. If however you want 
to get into big business systems then go for it.

I started out with a early early version of Weblogic, I figured most of 
it out myself as I didn't want to pay the frankly exorbitant costs of 
formal training, thinks have moved on a bit since those days and there 
is a lot more free stuff out there now.

Besides, EJB's are ... fun.

lipska


-- 
Lipska the Kat©: Troll hunter, sandbox destroyer
and farscape dreamer of Aeryn Sun
GNU/Linux user #560883 - http://www.linuxcounter.net

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#25104

bob smith <bob@coolfone.comze.com> wrote:

>I see a lot of jobs for J2EE programmers.
>
>Isn't J2SE the free Java whereas J2EE costs a lot?
>
>How do people learn J2EE without paying a lot of money?  Is there really much reason for an Average Joe to take on J2EE?
>
>Thanks.

Today, Netbeans <www.netbeans.org> mailed me this URL
<http://glassfish.java.net/javaee7/techkit/>. In addition if you
choose the Netbeans IDE they have a free download that includes
everything you need for Java EE.

That said, EE is huge and I suggest you find out the parts that are
most in demand (or easiest to understand!) and concentrate on those.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#25169

On 08/20/2013 07:47 PM, bob smith wrote:
> I see a lot of jobs for J2EE programmers.
>
> Isn't J2SE the free Java whereas J2EE costs a lot?
>
> How do people learn J2EE without paying a lot of money?  Is there really much reason for an Average Joe to take on J2EE?
>
> Thanks.
>
You need to look at job descriptions with an idea as to what problem 
they need solved, not so much the technology involved. You can be a Java 
EE expert but still fall flat on your face if you don't get the business 
logic.

Having said that, the whole business of differentiations of the Java 
platform is awkward and unfortunate. In order to do many "standard" 
things with Java you actually need Java EE libraries. I don't know the 
exact history, but I can see a few marketing dudes at Sun back in the 
day embracing the "enterprise" buzzword, and deciding that such and such 
APIs were enterprise-y...which is meaningless actually.

If you want to do serious work with Java you cannot not do Java EE. 
Unless you're really niche. And quite frankly, for most Java developers 
the amount of Java EE APIs they need to master is a small percentage of 
the whole.

Differentiate specs from vendor implementations. It's the latter that 
can cost a lot. But as others have said, there are a number that you can 
get free of charge.

You might think of Java EE as providing support for applications that 
run on a server that runs on a JVM, where the server is contractually 
obligated to provide a large number of facilities to the hosted apps. In 
comparison, a non Java EE app largely fends for itself, and runs 
directly on a JVM.

AHS

-- 
When a true genius appears, you can know him by this sign:
that all the dunces are in a confederacy against him.
-- Jonathan Swift

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#25172

On 8/29/2013 12:26 PM, Arved Sandstrom wrote:
> Having said that, the whole business of differentiations of the Java
> platform is awkward and unfortunate.

.NET has similar (client profile, full profile, CF, SL, PCL, WP, Win8).

>                                       In order to do many "standard"
> things with Java you actually need Java EE libraries. I don't know the
> exact history, but I can see a few marketing dudes at Sun back in the
> day embracing the "enterprise" buzzword, and deciding that such and such
> APIs were enterprise-y...which is meaningless actually.
>
> If you want to do serious work with Java you cannot not do Java EE.
> Unless you're really niche. And quite frankly, for most Java developers
> the amount of Java EE APIs they need to master is a small percentage of
> the whole.

That was how it was, but in latest versions it seems to me that they
have been willing to put more stuff in SE.

Arne

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#25174

In article <521fc2b1$0$300$14726298@news.sunsite.dk>, =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Arne_Vajh=F8j?= <arne@vajhoej.dk> wrote:
>On 8/29/2013 12:26 PM, Arved Sandstrom wrote:
>> Having said that, the whole business of differentiations of the Java
>> platform is awkward and unfortunate.
>
>..NET has similar (client profile, full profile, CF, SL, PCL, WP, Win8).
>
>>                                       In order to do many "standard"
>> things with Java you actually need Java EE libraries. I don't know the
>> exact history, but I can see a few marketing dudes at Sun back in the
>> day embracing the "enterprise" buzzword, and deciding that such and such
>> APIs were enterprise-y...which is meaningless actually.
>>
>> If you want to do serious work with Java you cannot not do Java EE.
>> Unless you're really niche. And quite frankly, for most Java developers
>> the amount of Java EE APIs they need to master is a small percentage of
>> the whole.
>
>That was how it was, but in latest versions it seems to me that they
>have been willing to put more stuff in SE.
>
>Arne
>
Arved may have been referring to jsp/servlets? I think jdbc has moved to SE. 
Personally I think you can do a lot of serious work without JEE, 
professionally you are likely to need JSP or servlets. (Spring can handle 
much of the JEE functionality.)

Eric

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#25176

On 8/29/2013 10:54 PM, EricF wrote:
> In article <521fc2b1$0$300$14726298@news.sunsite.dk>, =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Arne_Vajh=F8j?= <arne@vajhoej.dk> wrote:
>> On 8/29/2013 12:26 PM, Arved Sandstrom wrote:
>>> Having said that, the whole business of differentiations of the Java
>>> platform is awkward and unfortunate.
>>
>> ..NET has similar (client profile, full profile, CF, SL, PCL, WP, Win8).
>>
>>>                                        In order to do many "standard"
>>> things with Java you actually need Java EE libraries. I don't know the
>>> exact history, but I can see a few marketing dudes at Sun back in the
>>> day embracing the "enterprise" buzzword, and deciding that such and such
>>> APIs were enterprise-y...which is meaningless actually.
>>>
>>> If you want to do serious work with Java you cannot not do Java EE.
>>> Unless you're really niche. And quite frankly, for most Java developers
>>> the amount of Java EE APIs they need to master is a small percentage of
>>> the whole.
>>
>> That was how it was, but in latest versions it seems to me that they
>> have been willing to put more stuff in SE.
>>
> Arved may have been referring to jsp/servlets? I think jdbc has moved to SE.
> Personally I think you can do a lot of serious work without JEE,
> professionally you are likely to need JSP or servlets. (Spring can handle
> much of the JEE functionality.)

Most of JDBC has always been in SE.

Things that in early days should have been in SE but ended
up in EE:
* mail client
* web service client
* ORM

Things that in later days has been properly put in SE:
* web service client
* JMX

Arne

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#25179

On Fri, 30 Aug 2013 22:49:26 -0400, Arne Vajhøj wrote:

> Most of JDBC has always been in SE.
> 
> Things that in early days should have been in SE but ended up in EE:
> * mail client * web service client * ORM
> 
> Things that in later days has been properly put in SE:
> * web service client * JMX
>
FWIW, I mainly use SE Java to write the sort of stuff I'd formerly do in 
C, i.e. to get more portability and to take advantage of the larger 
standard class library and Swing and friends. The only stuff I've needed 
that hasn't been in SE was javamail (a separate package as of Java 6) and 
3rd party stuff:
- mstor (mbox access for javamail)
- Coco/R, a Java equivalent of lex+yacc 
- the Postgres jdbc library 
- dnsjava (DNS client libraries

I haven't (so far) needed to do anything with EE, appservers, etc.


-- 
martin@   | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org       |

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#25185

On 8/31/2013 6:58 AM, Martin Gregorie wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Aug 2013 22:49:26 -0400, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>
>> Most of JDBC has always been in SE.
>>
>> Things that in early days should have been in SE but ended up in EE:
>> * mail client * web service client * ORM
>>
>> Things that in later days has been properly put in SE:
>> * web service client * JMX
>>
> FWIW, I mainly use SE Java to write the sort of stuff I'd formerly do in
> C, i.e. to get more portability and to take advantage of the larger
> standard class library and Swing and friends. The only stuff I've needed
> that hasn't been in SE was javamail

Web service client and database ORM seems natural in SE context
to me. You have not had the need for them, but I think many must have.

Arne

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#25191

On Sat, 31 Aug 2013 21:39:57 -0400, Arne Vajhøj wrote:

> On 8/31/2013 6:58 AM, Martin Gregorie wrote:
>> On Fri, 30 Aug 2013 22:49:26 -0400, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>>
>>> Most of JDBC has always been in SE.
>>>
>>> Things that in early days should have been in SE but ended up in EE:
>>> * mail client * web service client * ORM
>>>
>>> Things that in later days has been properly put in SE:
>>> * web service client * JMX
>>>
>> FWIW, I mainly use SE Java to write the sort of stuff I'd formerly do
>> in C, i.e. to get more portability and to take advantage of the larger
>> standard class library and Swing and friends. The only stuff I've
>> needed that hasn't been in SE was javamail
> 
> Web service client and database ORM seems natural in SE context to me.
> You have not had the need for them, but I think many must have.
>
Fair comment. 

I haven't needed Web Service yet, though that doesn't mean that I won't 
need it, especially if it can be used to distribute Java applications 
rather than applets. I've nothing against the latter, or wouldn't if 
browser behaviour was a bit more consistent and reliable when running 
them. 

I've written a lot of SQL in the past and am happy to use it directly via 
JDBC, so encapsulating that in a class seems more natural to me than 
using the database ORM, but ymmv.


-- 
martin@   | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org       |

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#25192

On 9/1/2013 8:48 AM, Martin Gregorie wrote:
> On Sat, 31 Aug 2013 21:39:57 -0400, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>
>> On 8/31/2013 6:58 AM, Martin Gregorie wrote:
>>> On Fri, 30 Aug 2013 22:49:26 -0400, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>>>
>>>> Most of JDBC has always been in SE.
>>>>
>>>> Things that in early days should have been in SE but ended up in EE:
>>>> * mail client * web service client * ORM
>>>>
>>>> Things that in later days has been properly put in SE:
>>>> * web service client * JMX
>>>>
>>> FWIW, I mainly use SE Java to write the sort of stuff I'd formerly do
>>> in C, i.e. to get more portability and to take advantage of the larger
>>> standard class library and Swing and friends. The only stuff I've
>>> needed that hasn't been in SE was javamail
>>
>> Web service client and database ORM seems natural in SE context to me.
>> You have not had the need for them, but I think many must have.
>>
> Fair comment.
>
> I haven't needed Web Service yet, though that doesn't mean that I won't
> need it, especially if it can be used to distribute Java applications
> rather than applets. I've nothing against the latter, or wouldn't if
> browser behaviour was a bit more consistent and reliable when running
> them.

Web service calls is not so much about the deployment model as it is
about how the client communicate to the server.

> I've written a lot of SQL in the past and am happy to use it directly via
> JDBC, so encapsulating that in a class seems more natural to me than
> using the database ORM, but ymmv.

Some like ORM. And JPA unlike entity beans actually is usable in
SE context.

Arne

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#25198

On Sun, 01 Sep 2013 09:14:27 -0400, Arne Vajhøj wrote:

> Web service calls is not so much about the deployment model as it is
> about how the client communicate to the server.
>
Noted. Its unlikely I'd ever use it for that, but the deploy/update 
software aspects may be useful fairly soon. As far as the server 
communication aspects go, PHP will most likely do everything I'd need. 
This is fortunate since my web host supports PHP doesn't support anything 
specifically Java-related. At present I'm considering the pros and cons 
of:

(a) distributing a free-standing Java application, possibly via Web 
Services

or 

(b) using a PHP-managed web page to capture requests, transfer them to my 
box as e-mail, where they'd get validated, run through the Java 
application, and the results e-mailed back to the sender.   


-- 
martin@   | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org       |

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#25201

On 9/1/2013 2:35 PM, Martin Gregorie wrote:
> On Sun, 01 Sep 2013 09:14:27 -0400, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>
>> Web service calls is not so much about the deployment model as it is
>> about how the client communicate to the server.
>>
> Noted. Its unlikely I'd ever use it for that, but the deploy/update
> software aspects may be useful fairly soon. As far as the server
> communication aspects go, PHP will most likely do everything I'd need.
> This is fortunate since my web host supports PHP doesn't support anything
> specifically Java-related.

Java desktop app----(web service call)----PHP web app

works fine for client/server communication.

I would not use it for deploy/update.

Arne

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 3  [1] 2 3  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.java.programmer

csiph-web