Craig Walls: Message-Driven POJOs
Reading this article on the benefits of a POJO implementation instead of a full blown MDB EJB ie Message Driven Bean implementation along with app server. It starts to get into some of the benefits of using a less complicated infrastructure which I think is a good thing. It does raise the question in my mind, how do you account for and deploy POJO type applications. It's not as clean as deploying an app on an app server or even webMethods for that matter. Do you set up a dedicated infrastructure for POJO's or do you co-habitate with the app servers? What do others do? My thoughts are these types of apps can coexist with others. When talking JMS adapters, pushing out to the endpoints can make sense. Of course that can increase complexity, so management of those distributed objects must be accounted for. Any thoughts?
Wednesday, July 20, 2005
Tuesday, July 12, 2005
Lightning Strike
The server survived a direct lightning strike to house(A laptop did not). The house took some damage but it's not too bad. It could have been a lot worse. We are very thankful.
Friday, July 01, 2005
Open Source Ascendant - Editorial - CIO
Open Source Ascendant - Editorial - CIO
Interesting article about Linux cost savings. After reading the article, I'm very skeptical of the stated cost savings when compared to Unix. Red Hat Enterprise support is at least as expensive as Sun and HP (More in some cases). I think the author either didn't get the details or ignored them. The word free was used by the CIO of this company a couple of times. OSS does not mean free. And Redhat certainly is not. Hardware is pretty competitive among all the vendors, so I don't see a lot of potential savings there either unless you were comparing a Sunfire 15k against a Dell pizza box. I'm a fan of Open-Source but not a fan of unrealistic expectations or exaggerated cost savings.
The Open-Source movement definitely deserves credit for driving down the cost of more traditional Unix vendors. But the costs are now very competitive. A quick survey of the major players will show that it is a wash in most cases. Unless of course you are downloading a free Linux distribution and not buying support. Good luck with that.
Interesting article about Linux cost savings. After reading the article, I'm very skeptical of the stated cost savings when compared to Unix. Red Hat Enterprise support is at least as expensive as Sun and HP (More in some cases). I think the author either didn't get the details or ignored them. The word free was used by the CIO of this company a couple of times. OSS does not mean free. And Redhat certainly is not. Hardware is pretty competitive among all the vendors, so I don't see a lot of potential savings there either unless you were comparing a Sunfire 15k against a Dell pizza box. I'm a fan of Open-Source but not a fan of unrealistic expectations or exaggerated cost savings.
The Open-Source movement definitely deserves credit for driving down the cost of more traditional Unix vendors. But the costs are now very competitive. A quick survey of the major players will show that it is a wash in most cases. Unless of course you are downloading a free Linux distribution and not buying support. Good luck with that.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)