<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_12_02_1436250</id>
	<title>Service Oriented Architecture With Java</title>
	<author>samzenpus</author>
	<datestamp>1259778900000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.sexybiggetje.nl/" rel="nofollow">Martijn de Boer</a> writes <i>"The book has been written to provide the reader with a short introduction to the concepts of Service Oriented Architecture with Java. The book covers the theory and analysis from the start and is progressing to a more intermediate level slowly throughout the different chapters. This book has been written for software architects and programmers of the Java language who have an interest in building software using SOA concepts in their applications. The cover hints to a series called &ldquo;From Technologies to Solutions&rdquo;, and that is exactly what this book tries to do, it tries to explain the SOA technology with different case studies and a path for solutions for your applications."</i> Read below for the rest of Martijn's review.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Martijn de Boer writes " The book has been written to provide the reader with a short introduction to the concepts of Service Oriented Architecture with Java .
The book covers the theory and analysis from the start and is progressing to a more intermediate level slowly throughout the different chapters .
This book has been written for software architects and programmers of the Java language who have an interest in building software using SOA concepts in their applications .
The cover hints to a series called    From Technologies to Solutions    , and that is exactly what this book tries to do , it tries to explain the SOA technology with different case studies and a path for solutions for your applications .
" Read below for the rest of Martijn 's review .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Martijn de Boer writes "The book has been written to provide the reader with a short introduction to the concepts of Service Oriented Architecture with Java.
The book covers the theory and analysis from the start and is progressing to a more intermediate level slowly throughout the different chapters.
This book has been written for software architects and programmers of the Java language who have an interest in building software using SOA concepts in their applications.
The cover hints to a series called “From Technologies to Solutions”, and that is exactly what this book tries to do, it tries to explain the SOA technology with different case studies and a path for solutions for your applications.
" Read below for the rest of Martijn's review.</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30300308</id>
	<title>Re:Java!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259610420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Speed is not Java's problem.</p><p>Java's problem is that it just doesn't work half the time.  I mean often it seems like the perfect solution but then when you go to implement stuff, it just won't work correctly.  So annoying.  You waste more time trying to debug crap than actually developing your application.  And by debug I mean it's usually some sort of problem with the browser plugin or some implementation retardedness in the JVM or whatever.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Speed is not Java 's problem.Java 's problem is that it just does n't work half the time .
I mean often it seems like the perfect solution but then when you go to implement stuff , it just wo n't work correctly .
So annoying .
You waste more time trying to debug crap than actually developing your application .
And by debug I mean it 's usually some sort of problem with the browser plugin or some implementation retardedness in the JVM or whatever .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Speed is not Java's problem.Java's problem is that it just doesn't work half the time.
I mean often it seems like the perfect solution but then when you go to implement stuff, it just won't work correctly.
So annoying.
You waste more time trying to debug crap than actually developing your application.
And by debug I mean it's usually some sort of problem with the browser plugin or some implementation retardedness in the JVM or whatever.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30300210</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30309006</id>
	<title>Re:I'll admit...</title>
	<author>slim</author>
	<datestamp>1259843220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Aside from the familiarity of Java, what benefits would Java offer for web services?</p></div><p>From my perspective, the mainstream application server frameworks are all Java-centric. JBoss, WebSphere etc.</p><p>There's a laundy list of features you get from these containers - clustering, connection pooling, caching, load balancing, distributed deployment, etc.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.Net probably gives you all this too, but personally I prefer not to be locked into MS (Mono notwithstanding). The Java stuff is reasonably open, so you can migrate between app servers if you need to.</p><p>The mainstream Java IDEs all have plenty of support for web service development.</p><p>The big news nowadays is that the Java platform is a lot more friendly than it used to be for polyglot programming. Groovy, Jython, Clojure, JRuby are all lovely languages for writing the kind of stuff that Java tended to make fiddly.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Aside from the familiarity of Java , what benefits would Java offer for web services ? From my perspective , the mainstream application server frameworks are all Java-centric .
JBoss , WebSphere etc.There 's a laundy list of features you get from these containers - clustering , connection pooling , caching , load balancing , distributed deployment , etc .
.Net probably gives you all this too , but personally I prefer not to be locked into MS ( Mono notwithstanding ) .
The Java stuff is reasonably open , so you can migrate between app servers if you need to.The mainstream Java IDEs all have plenty of support for web service development.The big news nowadays is that the Java platform is a lot more friendly than it used to be for polyglot programming .
Groovy , Jython , Clojure , JRuby are all lovely languages for writing the kind of stuff that Java tended to make fiddly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Aside from the familiarity of Java, what benefits would Java offer for web services?From my perspective, the mainstream application server frameworks are all Java-centric.
JBoss, WebSphere etc.There's a laundy list of features you get from these containers - clustering, connection pooling, caching, load balancing, distributed deployment, etc.
.Net probably gives you all this too, but personally I prefer not to be locked into MS (Mono notwithstanding).
The Java stuff is reasonably open, so you can migrate between app servers if you need to.The mainstream Java IDEs all have plenty of support for web service development.The big news nowadays is that the Java platform is a lot more friendly than it used to be for polyglot programming.
Groovy, Jython, Clojure, JRuby are all lovely languages for writing the kind of stuff that Java tended to make fiddly.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30300258</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30304172</id>
	<title>Re:SOA</title>
	<author>Party Chief</author>
	<datestamp>1259580900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>right on! more like Same Old Anus for wont of a wanky TLA...</p><p>if you're going to design a service platform, design a freaking service platform - if you're going to build a service-based business, well then build a f*cking service-based business. if your legacy sh*t is sh*tty and holding you back from where you want to be well then rip it out. no need to apologise. no need to look to some enterprise-grade apologist for the magic bullet, there isn't one...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>right on !
more like Same Old Anus for wont of a wanky TLA...if you 're going to design a service platform , design a freaking service platform - if you 're going to build a service-based business , well then build a f * cking service-based business .
if your legacy sh * t is sh * tty and holding you back from where you want to be well then rip it out .
no need to apologise .
no need to look to some enterprise-grade apologist for the magic bullet , there is n't one.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>right on!
more like Same Old Anus for wont of a wanky TLA...if you're going to design a service platform, design a freaking service platform - if you're going to build a service-based business, well then build a f*cking service-based business.
if your legacy sh*t is sh*tty and holding you back from where you want to be well then rip it out.
no need to apologise.
no need to look to some enterprise-grade apologist for the magic bullet, there isn't one...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30300354</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30300426</id>
	<title>Re:I'll admit...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259610900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Java is okay for web services, but GBASIC is a *lot* better.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Java is okay for web services , but GBASIC is a * lot * better .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Java is okay for web services, but GBASIC is a *lot* better.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30300258</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30308780</id>
	<title>Re:SOA anecdote</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259839320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A colleague of me received something similar, he was invited to a conference called: "Master your SOA"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A colleague of me received something similar , he was invited to a conference called : " Master your SOA "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A colleague of me received something similar, he was invited to a conference called: "Master your SOA"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30300348</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30356996</id>
	<title>Re:Java!</title>
	<author>chris44larsen</author>
	<datestamp>1260219540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>and you are??????????

silly comment, please stop it dude.</htmltext>
<tokenext>and you are ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
silly comment , please stop it dude .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and you are??????????
silly comment, please stop it dude.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30306376</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30305578</id>
	<title>Re:Java is a great *idea*</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259586480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You are wrong about Java in certain details ("write once" is broken, has been broken for years, and remains broken; I can tell you stories about deploying applications that did crazy things like leak references only when run under the Solaris JVM, or that fail intermittently unless someone touches the JAR).</p><p>But you are absolutely right about the above comment.  It's incoherent and full of BS.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You are wrong about Java in certain details ( " write once " is broken , has been broken for years , and remains broken ; I can tell you stories about deploying applications that did crazy things like leak references only when run under the Solaris JVM , or that fail intermittently unless someone touches the JAR ) .But you are absolutely right about the above comment .
It 's incoherent and full of BS .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You are wrong about Java in certain details ("write once" is broken, has been broken for years, and remains broken; I can tell you stories about deploying applications that did crazy things like leak references only when run under the Solaris JVM, or that fail intermittently unless someone touches the JAR).But you are absolutely right about the above comment.
It's incoherent and full of BS.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30302710</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30305344</id>
	<title>Re:Java is a great *idea*</title>
	<author>ascari</author>
	<datestamp>1259585460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>A thought: I just read that slashdot post about brain slicing. Maybe the parent was written by H.M.? (The "slicee") Notice how it gets weirder and weirder - slice by slice?</htmltext>
<tokenext>A thought : I just read that slashdot post about brain slicing .
Maybe the parent was written by H.M. ?
( The " slicee " ) Notice how it gets weirder and weirder - slice by slice ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A thought: I just read that slashdot post about brain slicing.
Maybe the parent was written by H.M.?
(The "slicee") Notice how it gets weirder and weirder - slice by slice?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30302710</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30300746</id>
	<title>Exactly my thoughts.</title>
	<author>balbeir</author>
	<datestamp>1259612580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Java is mature. Not really the leading edge anymore.
The SOA hype did come and go.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Java is mature .
Not really the leading edge anymore .
The SOA hype did come and go .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Java is mature.
Not really the leading edge anymore.
The SOA hype did come and go.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30307450</id>
	<title>Re:Java is a great *idea*</title>
	<author>chthonicdaemon</author>
	<datestamp>1259601720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr></p><div class="quote"><p>...The proliferation of languages with linguistic and syntactual differences but little else to set them apart except a fan club. PHP, Ruby, Python, VB, Perl, all of them doing the same thing, serving the content.</p></div><p>I suppose the world would be a better place if we could all just agree on the One True Language instead of using different languages for different jobs or thinking about problems in different ways or playing around with different ways of implementing ideas?  The languages you mentioned (PHP, Ruby, Python, VB, Perl) have very little in common except being interpreted.  Although I understand the desire for a standard, it's as hard to see everyone agreeing on a single programming language, and its hard to buy the argument that the many languages available is hurting the web in any way.  I could make the same argument about application development, but people still manage to do it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...The proliferation of languages with linguistic and syntactual differences but little else to set them apart except a fan club .
PHP , Ruby , Python , VB , Perl , all of them doing the same thing , serving the content.I suppose the world would be a better place if we could all just agree on the One True Language instead of using different languages for different jobs or thinking about problems in different ways or playing around with different ways of implementing ideas ?
The languages you mentioned ( PHP , Ruby , Python , VB , Perl ) have very little in common except being interpreted .
Although I understand the desire for a standard , it 's as hard to see everyone agreeing on a single programming language , and its hard to buy the argument that the many languages available is hurting the web in any way .
I could make the same argument about application development , but people still manage to do it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ...The proliferation of languages with linguistic and syntactual differences but little else to set them apart except a fan club.
PHP, Ruby, Python, VB, Perl, all of them doing the same thing, serving the content.I suppose the world would be a better place if we could all just agree on the One True Language instead of using different languages for different jobs or thinking about problems in different ways or playing around with different ways of implementing ideas?
The languages you mentioned (PHP, Ruby, Python, VB, Perl) have very little in common except being interpreted.
Although I understand the desire for a standard, it's as hard to see everyone agreeing on a single programming language, and its hard to buy the argument that the many languages available is hurting the web in any way.
I could make the same argument about application development, but people still manage to do it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30302112</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30302116</id>
	<title>SOA using Java...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259574480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think I just thew up a little bit in my mouth.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think I just thew up a little bit in my mouth .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think I just thew up a little bit in my mouth.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30301000</id>
	<title>Teaching SOA using a single language?</title>
	<author>agbinfo</author>
	<datestamp>1259613660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Isn't the purpose of SOA to be platform and language independent?</p><p>I would think that a book on SOA that covers a single programming language is missing a key aspect of SOA.</p><p>I understand that if someone is writing an SOA application then the application can be written in Java only but I would expect the application to be tested using several languages.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is n't the purpose of SOA to be platform and language independent ? I would think that a book on SOA that covers a single programming language is missing a key aspect of SOA.I understand that if someone is writing an SOA application then the application can be written in Java only but I would expect the application to be tested using several languages .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Isn't the purpose of SOA to be platform and language independent?I would think that a book on SOA that covers a single programming language is missing a key aspect of SOA.I understand that if someone is writing an SOA application then the application can be written in Java only but I would expect the application to be tested using several languages.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30307870</id>
	<title>Re:Java is a great *idea*</title>
	<author>FlyingGuy</author>
	<datestamp>1259607720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Uhm, well normally I wouldn;t respond to such a vitriolic rant but I can't help myself because I am laughing so hard so here goes, fuck it I got karma to burn as they say...</p><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p>Unfortunately the implementation is poor.</p></div><p>Can you name a faster and more reliable implementation? Didn't think so.</p></div><p>A faster more reliable implementation of??  I mean if you are going to yell at me at least say what you are yelling about.</p><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p>Java held out the promise of write it once run it anywhere, but that promise has yet to be fulfilled as there are still differences from platform to platform that make developing in it a chore rather then enjoyable work.</p></div><p>If you use pure java code the cross platform stuff just works. Period.</p></div><p>Tell that to the rest of the people who have said the opposite.  Not that they are supporting my argument, but they do seem to be.</p><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p>Most of the problems are with the various implementations of both JIT's and VM's and mostly having to do with how things are abstracted eg: big -v- little endian, file access and those sorts of things.</p></div><p>What does this nonsensical gibberish mean?</p></div><p>Uhm I don't quite know what to say here.  Are you saying you don't know what JIT means?  Don't know what VM means?</p><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p>The tons of lib's that are mentioned as a god send have their own problems as well but that has more to do with programmer quality then anything else, but even the well designed and written ones still overlook the JIT and VM problems and then you end up having damn quirky behavior that can take weeks to track down, hence the problem of everyone sending out a complete JRE with their program and you end up in JRE hell with 14 different versions of JRE's on your system.</p></div><p>If you target older jre's you'll get very good compatibility across the board. There used to be issues caused by Microsoft's JRE... but that's why they built it. If you target a bleeding edge ANYTHING, you're going to have compatibility problems.</p></div><p>That suggestion seems rather counter intuitive since as the various JRE's are updated there are "just gotta have" features that either fix old problems or introduce new functionality, but yes I suppose you can stay with an older version, but the problem is OS's change, kernels change and therefor something that worked in an older version might not work when the OS/kernel changes.</p><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p>I liked the IDEA of having SUN control Java because at least things would have been consistent but that failed as well with to damn many versions being released. Now we have everyone and their grandmother writing JVM's JIT's and JRE's and none of them do anything exactly the same which has thrown ever more variability into the mix and just made everything messier since suddenly you now had to install vendor X's JRE or VM because some fool decided that it made everything 1\% faster and they JUST had to have it or alternatively it had a COOL name.</p></div><p>Why do you keep randomly throwing the acronym "JIT" everywhere? Again, you just poorly restated your earlier comment which isn't true and makes little sense.</p></div><p>Uhmm I am not trying to be insulting, but JIT is a term that is very commonly used to refer to (J)ust (I)n (T)ime compilers in lots of languages, but they really got traction with JAVA because of the dramatic ( an order of magnitude ) increase in performance over interpreted Java</p><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p>I see the biggest problem with WEB development today as two things. 1. Lack of a statefull connection and 2. The proliferation of languages with linguistic and syntactual differences but little else to set them apart except a fan club. PHP, Ruby, Python, VB, Perl, all of them doing the same thing, serving the content.</p></div><p>1) ???? How does this affect Java in anyway? 2) ???? How does this affect Java in anyway?</p><p><div class="quote"><p>The fundamental paradigm of the web is broken and needs repair badly. The solution is to split it, as I have said before, into two distinct camps, the Application Web and the Text and Pretty Picture Web because trying to mix the two has proven to be a miserable failure.</p></div></div><p>yes I did ramble on there a bit and got off track, but since they are talking about Service Oriented Architecture and that translates to the WWW then it is at least reasonably on topic.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>????? WTF</p><p>In summary,</p><p>FlyingGuy, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone on this site is now dumber for having read to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.</p></div><p>It is your right to disagree, but the level of vitriol with which you wrote your post is really uncalled for.  Might I respectfully suggest that you might be taking this a little tiny bit to personally?  I understand passion about anything, but really you were pretty over the top.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Uhm , well normally I wouldn ; t respond to such a vitriolic rant but I ca n't help myself because I am laughing so hard so here goes , fuck it I got karma to burn as they say...Unfortunately the implementation is poor.Can you name a faster and more reliable implementation ?
Did n't think so.A faster more reliable implementation of ? ?
I mean if you are going to yell at me at least say what you are yelling about.Java held out the promise of write it once run it anywhere , but that promise has yet to be fulfilled as there are still differences from platform to platform that make developing in it a chore rather then enjoyable work.If you use pure java code the cross platform stuff just works .
Period.Tell that to the rest of the people who have said the opposite .
Not that they are supporting my argument , but they do seem to be.Most of the problems are with the various implementations of both JIT 's and VM 's and mostly having to do with how things are abstracted eg : big -v- little endian , file access and those sorts of things.What does this nonsensical gibberish mean ? Uhm I do n't quite know what to say here .
Are you saying you do n't know what JIT means ?
Do n't know what VM means ? The tons of lib 's that are mentioned as a god send have their own problems as well but that has more to do with programmer quality then anything else , but even the well designed and written ones still overlook the JIT and VM problems and then you end up having damn quirky behavior that can take weeks to track down , hence the problem of everyone sending out a complete JRE with their program and you end up in JRE hell with 14 different versions of JRE 's on your system.If you target older jre 's you 'll get very good compatibility across the board .
There used to be issues caused by Microsoft 's JRE... but that 's why they built it .
If you target a bleeding edge ANYTHING , you 're going to have compatibility problems.That suggestion seems rather counter intuitive since as the various JRE 's are updated there are " just got ta have " features that either fix old problems or introduce new functionality , but yes I suppose you can stay with an older version , but the problem is OS 's change , kernels change and therefor something that worked in an older version might not work when the OS/kernel changes.I liked the IDEA of having SUN control Java because at least things would have been consistent but that failed as well with to damn many versions being released .
Now we have everyone and their grandmother writing JVM 's JIT 's and JRE 's and none of them do anything exactly the same which has thrown ever more variability into the mix and just made everything messier since suddenly you now had to install vendor X 's JRE or VM because some fool decided that it made everything 1 \ % faster and they JUST had to have it or alternatively it had a COOL name.Why do you keep randomly throwing the acronym " JIT " everywhere ?
Again , you just poorly restated your earlier comment which is n't true and makes little sense.Uhmm I am not trying to be insulting , but JIT is a term that is very commonly used to refer to ( J ) ust ( I ) n ( T ) ime compilers in lots of languages , but they really got traction with JAVA because of the dramatic ( an order of magnitude ) increase in performance over interpreted JavaI see the biggest problem with WEB development today as two things .
1. Lack of a statefull connection and 2 .
The proliferation of languages with linguistic and syntactual differences but little else to set them apart except a fan club .
PHP , Ruby , Python , VB , Perl , all of them doing the same thing , serving the content.1 ) ? ? ? ?
How does this affect Java in anyway ?
2 ) ? ? ? ?
How does this affect Java in anyway ? The fundamental paradigm of the web is broken and needs repair badly .
The solution is to split it , as I have said before , into two distinct camps , the Application Web and the Text and Pretty Picture Web because trying to mix the two has proven to be a miserable failure.yes I did ramble on there a bit and got off track , but since they are talking about Service Oriented Architecture and that translates to the WWW then it is at least reasonably on topic. ? ? ? ? ?
WTFIn summary,FlyingGuy , what you 've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard .
At no point in your rambling , incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought .
Everyone on this site is now dumber for having read to it .
I award you no points , and may God have mercy on your soul.It is your right to disagree , but the level of vitriol with which you wrote your post is really uncalled for .
Might I respectfully suggest that you might be taking this a little tiny bit to personally ?
I understand passion about anything , but really you were pretty over the top .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Uhm, well normally I wouldn;t respond to such a vitriolic rant but I can't help myself because I am laughing so hard so here goes, fuck it I got karma to burn as they say...Unfortunately the implementation is poor.Can you name a faster and more reliable implementation?
Didn't think so.A faster more reliable implementation of??
I mean if you are going to yell at me at least say what you are yelling about.Java held out the promise of write it once run it anywhere, but that promise has yet to be fulfilled as there are still differences from platform to platform that make developing in it a chore rather then enjoyable work.If you use pure java code the cross platform stuff just works.
Period.Tell that to the rest of the people who have said the opposite.
Not that they are supporting my argument, but they do seem to be.Most of the problems are with the various implementations of both JIT's and VM's and mostly having to do with how things are abstracted eg: big -v- little endian, file access and those sorts of things.What does this nonsensical gibberish mean?Uhm I don't quite know what to say here.
Are you saying you don't know what JIT means?
Don't know what VM means?The tons of lib's that are mentioned as a god send have their own problems as well but that has more to do with programmer quality then anything else, but even the well designed and written ones still overlook the JIT and VM problems and then you end up having damn quirky behavior that can take weeks to track down, hence the problem of everyone sending out a complete JRE with their program and you end up in JRE hell with 14 different versions of JRE's on your system.If you target older jre's you'll get very good compatibility across the board.
There used to be issues caused by Microsoft's JRE... but that's why they built it.
If you target a bleeding edge ANYTHING, you're going to have compatibility problems.That suggestion seems rather counter intuitive since as the various JRE's are updated there are "just gotta have" features that either fix old problems or introduce new functionality, but yes I suppose you can stay with an older version, but the problem is OS's change, kernels change and therefor something that worked in an older version might not work when the OS/kernel changes.I liked the IDEA of having SUN control Java because at least things would have been consistent but that failed as well with to damn many versions being released.
Now we have everyone and their grandmother writing JVM's JIT's and JRE's and none of them do anything exactly the same which has thrown ever more variability into the mix and just made everything messier since suddenly you now had to install vendor X's JRE or VM because some fool decided that it made everything 1\% faster and they JUST had to have it or alternatively it had a COOL name.Why do you keep randomly throwing the acronym "JIT" everywhere?
Again, you just poorly restated your earlier comment which isn't true and makes little sense.Uhmm I am not trying to be insulting, but JIT is a term that is very commonly used to refer to (J)ust (I)n (T)ime compilers in lots of languages, but they really got traction with JAVA because of the dramatic ( an order of magnitude ) increase in performance over interpreted JavaI see the biggest problem with WEB development today as two things.
1. Lack of a statefull connection and 2.
The proliferation of languages with linguistic and syntactual differences but little else to set them apart except a fan club.
PHP, Ruby, Python, VB, Perl, all of them doing the same thing, serving the content.1) ????
How does this affect Java in anyway?
2) ????
How does this affect Java in anyway?The fundamental paradigm of the web is broken and needs repair badly.
The solution is to split it, as I have said before, into two distinct camps, the Application Web and the Text and Pretty Picture Web because trying to mix the two has proven to be a miserable failure.yes I did ramble on there a bit and got off track, but since they are talking about Service Oriented Architecture and that translates to the WWW then it is at least reasonably on topic.?????
WTFIn summary,FlyingGuy, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard.
At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought.
Everyone on this site is now dumber for having read to it.
I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.It is your right to disagree, but the level of vitriol with which you wrote your post is really uncalled for.
Might I respectfully suggest that you might be taking this a little tiny bit to personally?
I understand passion about anything, but really you were pretty over the top.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30302710</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30300370</id>
	<title>Axis 1.x</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259610660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"read why [Axis] 2.0 hasn't been adopted much yet"</p><p>Because it's shit. The code generators don't work (enums fail spectacularly amongst other things), it's more complex and the only thing it can do over Axis 1.4 is namespace prefixes in the XML - something that could easily be added I'm sure.</p><p>The Apache Foundation need to get their act together with this API.</p><p>They should be using Annotations to specify in your data model the XSD parameters (minoccurs, etc). I expect the other web service frameworks for Java are already utilising these.</p><p>Update Java2WSDL to use the annotations, so generated WSDLs are more accurate and concise. If possible, put the Javadoc comment into an XSD documentation tag.</p><p>With Axis it's like they did 80\% of the job and fucked off.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" read why [ Axis ] 2.0 has n't been adopted much yet " Because it 's shit .
The code generators do n't work ( enums fail spectacularly amongst other things ) , it 's more complex and the only thing it can do over Axis 1.4 is namespace prefixes in the XML - something that could easily be added I 'm sure.The Apache Foundation need to get their act together with this API.They should be using Annotations to specify in your data model the XSD parameters ( minoccurs , etc ) .
I expect the other web service frameworks for Java are already utilising these.Update Java2WSDL to use the annotations , so generated WSDLs are more accurate and concise .
If possible , put the Javadoc comment into an XSD documentation tag.With Axis it 's like they did 80 \ % of the job and fucked off .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"read why [Axis] 2.0 hasn't been adopted much yet"Because it's shit.
The code generators don't work (enums fail spectacularly amongst other things), it's more complex and the only thing it can do over Axis 1.4 is namespace prefixes in the XML - something that could easily be added I'm sure.The Apache Foundation need to get their act together with this API.They should be using Annotations to specify in your data model the XSD parameters (minoccurs, etc).
I expect the other web service frameworks for Java are already utilising these.Update Java2WSDL to use the annotations, so generated WSDLs are more accurate and concise.
If possible, put the Javadoc comment into an XSD documentation tag.With Axis it's like they did 80\% of the job and fucked off.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30364246</id>
	<title>Re:Save Our Asteroids</title>
	<author>elnyka</author>
	<datestamp>1260282720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I know it's been a few days, but damn...<p><div class="quote"><p>I read a paper on SOA once.  It might as well be titled how to prevent small rocks from crashing into our Sun.</p></div><p>So you base your opinion on reading a paper on SOA once? Amazing.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Anything that uses XML for RPC and has no concept of distributed transactions (Compensation) rightfully deserves to continue its steady march into irrelevent obscurity</p></div><p>1. XML for RPC, why not? It's just a freaking format for transporting stuff. I know there are obvious problems with the bulk of WS-*, but there is nothing inherently wrong with using XML for RPC <b>in certain contexs</b> </p><p>

2. Distributed transactions are an academic/vendor/architect astronaut white elephant, the solution for very extreme, fringe scenarios where simultaneous ACID properties over distributed resources is actually needed more than scalability. They aren't scalable, they are hard to reason with, and this is why no one that has to deal with massive scalability and availability requirements uses them.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>If it doesn't at least support distributed transactions its not worth wasting ones time over.</p></div><p>Uh, why would an enterprise architecture style provides for transaction management, which is an application-specific feature. Distributed transactions are not even an infrastructure feature. No one worth mentioning uses them, and almost everyone that uses them didn't need them in the first place. This is why people in the trenches opt for compensating (rollback) transactions and "sagas" over distributed transactions. And this is not "news", so I don't know from what kind of work experience you keep talking about distributed transactions as the make-or-break factor in deciding over SOA... or anything for that matter.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I know it 's been a few days , but damn...I read a paper on SOA once .
It might as well be titled how to prevent small rocks from crashing into our Sun.So you base your opinion on reading a paper on SOA once ?
Amazing.Anything that uses XML for RPC and has no concept of distributed transactions ( Compensation ) rightfully deserves to continue its steady march into irrelevent obscurity1 .
XML for RPC , why not ?
It 's just a freaking format for transporting stuff .
I know there are obvious problems with the bulk of WS- * , but there is nothing inherently wrong with using XML for RPC in certain contexs 2 .
Distributed transactions are an academic/vendor/architect astronaut white elephant , the solution for very extreme , fringe scenarios where simultaneous ACID properties over distributed resources is actually needed more than scalability .
They are n't scalable , they are hard to reason with , and this is why no one that has to deal with massive scalability and availability requirements uses them.If it does n't at least support distributed transactions its not worth wasting ones time over.Uh , why would an enterprise architecture style provides for transaction management , which is an application-specific feature .
Distributed transactions are not even an infrastructure feature .
No one worth mentioning uses them , and almost everyone that uses them did n't need them in the first place .
This is why people in the trenches opt for compensating ( rollback ) transactions and " sagas " over distributed transactions .
And this is not " news " , so I do n't know from what kind of work experience you keep talking about distributed transactions as the make-or-break factor in deciding over SOA... or anything for that matter .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know it's been a few days, but damn...I read a paper on SOA once.
It might as well be titled how to prevent small rocks from crashing into our Sun.So you base your opinion on reading a paper on SOA once?
Amazing.Anything that uses XML for RPC and has no concept of distributed transactions (Compensation) rightfully deserves to continue its steady march into irrelevent obscurity1.
XML for RPC, why not?
It's just a freaking format for transporting stuff.
I know there are obvious problems with the bulk of WS-*, but there is nothing inherently wrong with using XML for RPC in certain contexs 

2.
Distributed transactions are an academic/vendor/architect astronaut white elephant, the solution for very extreme, fringe scenarios where simultaneous ACID properties over distributed resources is actually needed more than scalability.
They aren't scalable, they are hard to reason with, and this is why no one that has to deal with massive scalability and availability requirements uses them.If it doesn't at least support distributed transactions its not worth wasting ones time over.Uh, why would an enterprise architecture style provides for transaction management, which is an application-specific feature.
Distributed transactions are not even an infrastructure feature.
No one worth mentioning uses them, and almost everyone that uses them didn't need them in the first place.
This is why people in the trenches opt for compensating (rollback) transactions and "sagas" over distributed transactions.
And this is not "news", so I don't know from what kind of work experience you keep talking about distributed transactions as the make-or-break factor in deciding over SOA... or anything for that matter.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30300654</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30300654</id>
	<title>Save Our Asteroids</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259612040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I read a paper on SOA once.  It might as well be titled how to prevent small rocks from crashing into our Sun.</p><p>Anything that uses XML for RPC and has no concept of distributed transactions (Compensation) rightfully deserves to continue its steady march into irrelevent obscurity like all the other nonsensical marketing based concepts before it.</p><p>SOA as a concept is "duh"<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.. SOA as popularly implemented (BPL) is "What year is this and you want me to do what?"</p><p>No thank you.  If it doesn't at least support distributed transactions its not worth wasting ones time over.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I read a paper on SOA once .
It might as well be titled how to prevent small rocks from crashing into our Sun.Anything that uses XML for RPC and has no concept of distributed transactions ( Compensation ) rightfully deserves to continue its steady march into irrelevent obscurity like all the other nonsensical marketing based concepts before it.SOA as a concept is " duh " .. SOA as popularly implemented ( BPL ) is " What year is this and you want me to do what ?
" No thank you .
If it does n't at least support distributed transactions its not worth wasting ones time over .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I read a paper on SOA once.
It might as well be titled how to prevent small rocks from crashing into our Sun.Anything that uses XML for RPC and has no concept of distributed transactions (Compensation) rightfully deserves to continue its steady march into irrelevent obscurity like all the other nonsensical marketing based concepts before it.SOA as a concept is "duh" .. SOA as popularly implemented (BPL) is "What year is this and you want me to do what?
"No thank you.
If it doesn't at least support distributed transactions its not worth wasting ones time over.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30301956</id>
	<title>SOA??!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259574000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>WTF, I thought SOA was Start Of Authority...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>WTF , I thought SOA was Start Of Authority.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>WTF, I thought SOA was Start Of Authority...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30310340</id>
	<title>Re:I'll admit...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259856660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I've never worked on a web service in Anything but VB, it handles everything we need it to do, which is very basic (pun intended).</p></div><p>Yea and your site will not work on my nix box so I take my business else where.  Go ahead write it in VB I'll just spend my money with your competitor.  Their site is cross-platform compatible.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've never worked on a web service in Anything but VB , it handles everything we need it to do , which is very basic ( pun intended ) .Yea and your site will not work on my nix box so I take my business else where .
Go ahead write it in VB I 'll just spend my money with your competitor .
Their site is cross-platform compatible .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've never worked on a web service in Anything but VB, it handles everything we need it to do, which is very basic (pun intended).Yea and your site will not work on my nix box so I take my business else where.
Go ahead write it in VB I'll just spend my money with your competitor.
Their site is cross-platform compatible.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30300258</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30307996</id>
	<title>Re:Java is a great *idea*</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259609700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It seems as though you know the meaning of a bunch of individual terms, but are desperately stringing them together in nonsensical ways.  It's understandable why readers are frustrated, because few of the things you wrote make sense, even if the individual words have meaning.  They're written as though you're high or drunk or one of those old middle manager guys who stands around spewing out-of-context jargon they don't understand.</p><p>You may be none of those things, but be aware that your tangential writing style -- especially your tendency to refer to things unrelated in any way whatsoever to the context under discussion -- and your poor grasp of the technical aspects of the words you're using are going to make it easier for readers to mistake you for an idiot.</p><p><div class="quote"><p> they are talking about Service Oriented Architecture and that translates to the WWW</p></div><p>This is factually wrong, and is a pretty good example of the sort of "talking about something you don't understand" problem that readers have with your post.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It seems as though you know the meaning of a bunch of individual terms , but are desperately stringing them together in nonsensical ways .
It 's understandable why readers are frustrated , because few of the things you wrote make sense , even if the individual words have meaning .
They 're written as though you 're high or drunk or one of those old middle manager guys who stands around spewing out-of-context jargon they do n't understand.You may be none of those things , but be aware that your tangential writing style -- especially your tendency to refer to things unrelated in any way whatsoever to the context under discussion -- and your poor grasp of the technical aspects of the words you 're using are going to make it easier for readers to mistake you for an idiot .
they are talking about Service Oriented Architecture and that translates to the WWWThis is factually wrong , and is a pretty good example of the sort of " talking about something you do n't understand " problem that readers have with your post .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It seems as though you know the meaning of a bunch of individual terms, but are desperately stringing them together in nonsensical ways.
It's understandable why readers are frustrated, because few of the things you wrote make sense, even if the individual words have meaning.
They're written as though you're high or drunk or one of those old middle manager guys who stands around spewing out-of-context jargon they don't understand.You may be none of those things, but be aware that your tangential writing style -- especially your tendency to refer to things unrelated in any way whatsoever to the context under discussion -- and your poor grasp of the technical aspects of the words you're using are going to make it easier for readers to mistake you for an idiot.
they are talking about Service Oriented Architecture and that translates to the WWWThis is factually wrong, and is a pretty good example of the sort of "talking about something you don't understand" problem that readers have with your post.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30307870</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30305910</id>
	<title>mod 0P</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259588520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><A HREF="http://goat.cx/" title="goat.cx" rel="nofollow">Real problems yKou got there. Or is the group that open plaQtform,</a> [goat.cx]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Real problems yKou got there .
Or is the group that open plaQtform , [ goat.cx ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Real problems yKou got there.
Or is the group that open plaQtform, [goat.cx]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30300258</id>
	<title>I'll admit...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259610180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The only "service" I started from Scratch was the one to make the CD Tray eject every 5 minutes. It's been alot of fun pulling pranks on room mates and co-workers. However my co-worker had the profound idea of putting this on a handful of USB sticks and have it auto-install when plugged in to a computer. Then we toss a handful of these things in the parking lot, and whoever puts in an IT Request about it gets fired.</p><p>As for the book, I've never worked on a web service in Anything but VB, it handles everything we need it to do, which is very basic (pun intended).</p><p>Aside from the familiarity of Java, what benefits would Java offer for web services?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The only " service " I started from Scratch was the one to make the CD Tray eject every 5 minutes .
It 's been alot of fun pulling pranks on room mates and co-workers .
However my co-worker had the profound idea of putting this on a handful of USB sticks and have it auto-install when plugged in to a computer .
Then we toss a handful of these things in the parking lot , and whoever puts in an IT Request about it gets fired.As for the book , I 've never worked on a web service in Anything but VB , it handles everything we need it to do , which is very basic ( pun intended ) .Aside from the familiarity of Java , what benefits would Java offer for web services ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The only "service" I started from Scratch was the one to make the CD Tray eject every 5 minutes.
It's been alot of fun pulling pranks on room mates and co-workers.
However my co-worker had the profound idea of putting this on a handful of USB sticks and have it auto-install when plugged in to a computer.
Then we toss a handful of these things in the parking lot, and whoever puts in an IT Request about it gets fired.As for the book, I've never worked on a web service in Anything but VB, it handles everything we need it to do, which is very basic (pun intended).Aside from the familiarity of Java, what benefits would Java offer for web services?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30305470</id>
	<title>Re:I'll admit...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259586060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Aside from the familiarity of Java, what benefits would Java offer for web services?</p></div><p>Compared to VB, one huge, huge advantage:  Running on a server class operating system.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Aside from the familiarity of Java , what benefits would Java offer for web services ? Compared to VB , one huge , huge advantage : Running on a server class operating system .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Aside from the familiarity of Java, what benefits would Java offer for web services?Compared to VB, one huge, huge advantage:  Running on a server class operating system.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30300258</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30308586</id>
	<title>Download it here</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259836080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>http://old.book.pdfchm.net/service-oriented-architecture-with-java-11656/</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //old.book.pdfchm.net/service-oriented-architecture-with-java-11656/</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://old.book.pdfchm.net/service-oriented-architecture-with-java-11656/</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30307968</id>
	<title>desktop applications</title>
	<author>mahadiga</author>
	<datestamp>1259609100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>SOA is good for <i>connecting</i> desktop applications to web browser.</htmltext>
<tokenext>SOA is good for connecting desktop applications to web browser .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>SOA is good for connecting desktop applications to web browser.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30302112</id>
	<title>Java is a great *idea*</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259574480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Unfortunately the implementation is poor.</p><p>Java held out the promise of write it once run it anywhere, but that promise has yet to be fulfilled as there are still differences from platform to platform that make developing in it a chore rather then enjoyable work.</p><p>Most of the problems are with the various implementations of both JIT's and VM's and mostly having to do with how things are abstracted eg: big -v- little endian, file access and those sorts of things.</p><p>The tons of lib's that are mentioned as a god send have their own problems as well but that has more to do with programmer quality then anything else, but even the well designed and written ones still overlook the JIT and VM problems and then you end up having damn quirky behavior that can take weeks to track down, hence the problem of everyone sending out a complete JRE with their program and you end up in JRE hell with 14 different versions of JRE's on your system.</p><p>I liked the IDEA of having SUN control Java because at least things would have been consistent but that failed as well with to damn many  versions being released.  Now we have everyone and their grandmother writing JVM's JIT's and JRE's and none of them do anything exactly the same which has thrown ever more variability into the mix and just made everything messier since suddenly you now had to install vendor X's JRE or VM because some fool decided that it made everything 1\% faster and they JUST had to have it or alternatively it had a COOL name.</p><p>I see the biggest problem with WEB development today as two things.  1. Lack of a statefull connection and 2. The proliferation of languages with linguistic and syntactual differences but little else to set them apart except a fan club.  PHP, Ruby, Python, VB, Perl, all of them doing the same thing, serving the content.</p><p>The fundamental paradigm of the web is broken and needs repair badly.  The solution is to split it, as I have said before, into two distinct camps, the Application Web and the Text and Pretty Picture Web because trying to mix the two has proven to be a miserable failure.</p><p>Perhaps HTML5 will provide some relief but I think it will simply complicate things more and cause more problems then it is worth when trying to mix the two, but we will see.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Unfortunately the implementation is poor.Java held out the promise of write it once run it anywhere , but that promise has yet to be fulfilled as there are still differences from platform to platform that make developing in it a chore rather then enjoyable work.Most of the problems are with the various implementations of both JIT 's and VM 's and mostly having to do with how things are abstracted eg : big -v- little endian , file access and those sorts of things.The tons of lib 's that are mentioned as a god send have their own problems as well but that has more to do with programmer quality then anything else , but even the well designed and written ones still overlook the JIT and VM problems and then you end up having damn quirky behavior that can take weeks to track down , hence the problem of everyone sending out a complete JRE with their program and you end up in JRE hell with 14 different versions of JRE 's on your system.I liked the IDEA of having SUN control Java because at least things would have been consistent but that failed as well with to damn many versions being released .
Now we have everyone and their grandmother writing JVM 's JIT 's and JRE 's and none of them do anything exactly the same which has thrown ever more variability into the mix and just made everything messier since suddenly you now had to install vendor X 's JRE or VM because some fool decided that it made everything 1 \ % faster and they JUST had to have it or alternatively it had a COOL name.I see the biggest problem with WEB development today as two things .
1. Lack of a statefull connection and 2 .
The proliferation of languages with linguistic and syntactual differences but little else to set them apart except a fan club .
PHP , Ruby , Python , VB , Perl , all of them doing the same thing , serving the content.The fundamental paradigm of the web is broken and needs repair badly .
The solution is to split it , as I have said before , into two distinct camps , the Application Web and the Text and Pretty Picture Web because trying to mix the two has proven to be a miserable failure.Perhaps HTML5 will provide some relief but I think it will simply complicate things more and cause more problems then it is worth when trying to mix the two , but we will see .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unfortunately the implementation is poor.Java held out the promise of write it once run it anywhere, but that promise has yet to be fulfilled as there are still differences from platform to platform that make developing in it a chore rather then enjoyable work.Most of the problems are with the various implementations of both JIT's and VM's and mostly having to do with how things are abstracted eg: big -v- little endian, file access and those sorts of things.The tons of lib's that are mentioned as a god send have their own problems as well but that has more to do with programmer quality then anything else, but even the well designed and written ones still overlook the JIT and VM problems and then you end up having damn quirky behavior that can take weeks to track down, hence the problem of everyone sending out a complete JRE with their program and you end up in JRE hell with 14 different versions of JRE's on your system.I liked the IDEA of having SUN control Java because at least things would have been consistent but that failed as well with to damn many  versions being released.
Now we have everyone and their grandmother writing JVM's JIT's and JRE's and none of them do anything exactly the same which has thrown ever more variability into the mix and just made everything messier since suddenly you now had to install vendor X's JRE or VM because some fool decided that it made everything 1\% faster and they JUST had to have it or alternatively it had a COOL name.I see the biggest problem with WEB development today as two things.
1. Lack of a statefull connection and 2.
The proliferation of languages with linguistic and syntactual differences but little else to set them apart except a fan club.
PHP, Ruby, Python, VB, Perl, all of them doing the same thing, serving the content.The fundamental paradigm of the web is broken and needs repair badly.
The solution is to split it, as I have said before, into two distinct camps, the Application Web and the Text and Pretty Picture Web because trying to mix the two has proven to be a miserable failure.Perhaps HTML5 will provide some relief but I think it will simply complicate things more and cause more problems then it is worth when trying to mix the two, but we will see.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30300652</id>
	<title>Re:Java!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259612040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I've not found that. I'll admit it's really really boring though.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've not found that .
I 'll admit it 's really really boring though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've not found that.
I'll admit it's really really boring though.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30300308</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30306350</id>
	<title>Re:Java!</title>
	<author>elnyka</author>
	<datestamp>1259591580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Speed is not Java's problem.</p><p>Java's problem is that it just doesn't work half the time.  I mean often it seems like the perfect solution but then when you go to implement stuff, it just won't work correctly.  So annoying.  You waste more time trying to debug crap than actually developing your application.  And by debug I mean it's usually some sort of problem with the browser plugin or some implementation retardedness in the JVM or whatever.</p></div><p>Just because YOU have problems doing your school homework and toy apps with Java, that doesn't mean Java does not work half the time in the industry, in the real world for the rest of us.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Speed is not Java 's problem.Java 's problem is that it just does n't work half the time .
I mean often it seems like the perfect solution but then when you go to implement stuff , it just wo n't work correctly .
So annoying .
You waste more time trying to debug crap than actually developing your application .
And by debug I mean it 's usually some sort of problem with the browser plugin or some implementation retardedness in the JVM or whatever.Just because YOU have problems doing your school homework and toy apps with Java , that does n't mean Java does not work half the time in the industry , in the real world for the rest of us .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Speed is not Java's problem.Java's problem is that it just doesn't work half the time.
I mean often it seems like the perfect solution but then when you go to implement stuff, it just won't work correctly.
So annoying.
You waste more time trying to debug crap than actually developing your application.
And by debug I mean it's usually some sort of problem with the browser plugin or some implementation retardedness in the JVM or whatever.Just because YOU have problems doing your school homework and toy apps with Java, that doesn't mean Java does not work half the time in the industry, in the real world for the rest of us.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30300308</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30302710</id>
	<title>Re:Java is a great *idea*</title>
	<author>binarylarry</author>
	<datestamp>1259576100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Unfortunately the implementation is poor.</p></div><p>Can you name a faster and more reliable implementation? Didn't think so.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Java held out the promise of write it once run it anywhere, but that promise has yet to be fulfilled as there are still differences from platform to platform that make developing in it a chore rather then enjoyable work.</p></div><p>If you use pure java code the cross platform stuff just works. Period.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Most of the problems are with the various implementations of both JIT's and VM's and mostly having to do with how things are abstracted eg: big -v- little endian, file access and those sorts of things.</p></div><p>What does this nonsensical gibberish mean?</p><p><div class="quote"><p>The tons of lib's that are mentioned as a god send have their own problems as well but that has more to do with programmer quality then anything else, but even the well designed and written ones still overlook the JIT and VM problems and then you end up having damn quirky behavior that can take weeks to track down, hence the problem of everyone sending out a complete JRE with their program and you end up in JRE hell with 14 different versions of JRE's on your system.</p></div><p>If you target older jre's you'll get very good compatibility across the board. There used to be issues caused by Microsoft's JRE... but that's why they built it. If you target a bleeding edge ANYTHING, you're going to have compatibility problems.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>I liked the IDEA of having SUN control Java because at least things would have been consistent but that failed as well with to damn many versions being released. Now we have everyone and their grandmother writing JVM's JIT's and JRE's and none of them do anything exactly the same which has thrown ever more variability into the mix and just made everything messier since suddenly you now had to install vendor X's JRE or VM because some fool decided that it made everything 1\% faster and they JUST had to have it or alternatively it had a COOL name.</p></div><p>Why do you keep randomly throwing the acronym "JIT" everywhere? Again, you just poorly restated your earlier comment which isn't true and makes little sense.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>I see the biggest problem with WEB development today as two things. 1. Lack of a statefull connection and 2. The proliferation of languages with linguistic and syntactual differences but little else to set them apart except a fan club. PHP, Ruby, Python, VB, Perl, all of them doing the same thing, serving the content.</p></div><p>1) ???? How does this affect Java in anyway? 2) ???? How does this affect Java in anyway?</p><p><div class="quote"><p>The fundamental paradigm of the web is broken and needs repair badly. The solution is to split it, as I have said before, into two distinct camps, the Application Web and the Text and Pretty Picture Web because trying to mix the two has proven to be a miserable failure.</p></div><p>????? WTF</p><p>In summary,</p><p>FlyingGuy, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone on this site is now dumber for having read to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Unfortunately the implementation is poor.Can you name a faster and more reliable implementation ?
Did n't think so.Java held out the promise of write it once run it anywhere , but that promise has yet to be fulfilled as there are still differences from platform to platform that make developing in it a chore rather then enjoyable work.If you use pure java code the cross platform stuff just works .
Period.Most of the problems are with the various implementations of both JIT 's and VM 's and mostly having to do with how things are abstracted eg : big -v- little endian , file access and those sorts of things.What does this nonsensical gibberish mean ? The tons of lib 's that are mentioned as a god send have their own problems as well but that has more to do with programmer quality then anything else , but even the well designed and written ones still overlook the JIT and VM problems and then you end up having damn quirky behavior that can take weeks to track down , hence the problem of everyone sending out a complete JRE with their program and you end up in JRE hell with 14 different versions of JRE 's on your system.If you target older jre 's you 'll get very good compatibility across the board .
There used to be issues caused by Microsoft 's JRE... but that 's why they built it .
If you target a bleeding edge ANYTHING , you 're going to have compatibility problems.I liked the IDEA of having SUN control Java because at least things would have been consistent but that failed as well with to damn many versions being released .
Now we have everyone and their grandmother writing JVM 's JIT 's and JRE 's and none of them do anything exactly the same which has thrown ever more variability into the mix and just made everything messier since suddenly you now had to install vendor X 's JRE or VM because some fool decided that it made everything 1 \ % faster and they JUST had to have it or alternatively it had a COOL name.Why do you keep randomly throwing the acronym " JIT " everywhere ?
Again , you just poorly restated your earlier comment which is n't true and makes little sense.I see the biggest problem with WEB development today as two things .
1. Lack of a statefull connection and 2 .
The proliferation of languages with linguistic and syntactual differences but little else to set them apart except a fan club .
PHP , Ruby , Python , VB , Perl , all of them doing the same thing , serving the content.1 ) ? ? ? ?
How does this affect Java in anyway ?
2 ) ? ? ? ?
How does this affect Java in anyway ? The fundamental paradigm of the web is broken and needs repair badly .
The solution is to split it , as I have said before , into two distinct camps , the Application Web and the Text and Pretty Picture Web because trying to mix the two has proven to be a miserable failure. ? ? ? ? ?
WTFIn summary,FlyingGuy , what you 've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard .
At no point in your rambling , incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought .
Everyone on this site is now dumber for having read to it .
I award you no points , and may God have mercy on your soul .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unfortunately the implementation is poor.Can you name a faster and more reliable implementation?
Didn't think so.Java held out the promise of write it once run it anywhere, but that promise has yet to be fulfilled as there are still differences from platform to platform that make developing in it a chore rather then enjoyable work.If you use pure java code the cross platform stuff just works.
Period.Most of the problems are with the various implementations of both JIT's and VM's and mostly having to do with how things are abstracted eg: big -v- little endian, file access and those sorts of things.What does this nonsensical gibberish mean?The tons of lib's that are mentioned as a god send have their own problems as well but that has more to do with programmer quality then anything else, but even the well designed and written ones still overlook the JIT and VM problems and then you end up having damn quirky behavior that can take weeks to track down, hence the problem of everyone sending out a complete JRE with their program and you end up in JRE hell with 14 different versions of JRE's on your system.If you target older jre's you'll get very good compatibility across the board.
There used to be issues caused by Microsoft's JRE... but that's why they built it.
If you target a bleeding edge ANYTHING, you're going to have compatibility problems.I liked the IDEA of having SUN control Java because at least things would have been consistent but that failed as well with to damn many versions being released.
Now we have everyone and their grandmother writing JVM's JIT's and JRE's and none of them do anything exactly the same which has thrown ever more variability into the mix and just made everything messier since suddenly you now had to install vendor X's JRE or VM because some fool decided that it made everything 1\% faster and they JUST had to have it or alternatively it had a COOL name.Why do you keep randomly throwing the acronym "JIT" everywhere?
Again, you just poorly restated your earlier comment which isn't true and makes little sense.I see the biggest problem with WEB development today as two things.
1. Lack of a statefull connection and 2.
The proliferation of languages with linguistic and syntactual differences but little else to set them apart except a fan club.
PHP, Ruby, Python, VB, Perl, all of them doing the same thing, serving the content.1) ????
How does this affect Java in anyway?
2) ????
How does this affect Java in anyway?The fundamental paradigm of the web is broken and needs repair badly.
The solution is to split it, as I have said before, into two distinct camps, the Application Web and the Text and Pretty Picture Web because trying to mix the two has proven to be a miserable failure.?????
WTFIn summary,FlyingGuy, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard.
At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought.
Everyone on this site is now dumber for having read to it.
I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30302112</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30300210</id>
	<title>Java!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259610000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Java is slow and useless, I write all my code in assembler.
<br> <br>
Not really, but I thought I would get all those comments out of the way.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Java is slow and useless , I write all my code in assembler .
Not really , but I thought I would get all those comments out of the way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Java is slow and useless, I write all my code in assembler.
Not really, but I thought I would get all those comments out of the way.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30300346</id>
	<title>Re:I'll admit...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259610540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Aside from the familiarity of Java, what benefits would Java offer for web services?</i></p><p>If you want your web site to be a bloated piece of crap, Java is by far the best choice.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Aside from the familiarity of Java , what benefits would Java offer for web services ? If you want your web site to be a bloated piece of crap , Java is by far the best choice .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Aside from the familiarity of Java, what benefits would Java offer for web services?If you want your web site to be a bloated piece of crap, Java is by far the best choice.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30300258</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30308192</id>
	<title>Re:SOA anecdote</title>
	<author>node159</author>
	<datestamp>1259872140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We worked with a product who's acronym was JIS (when said, can not be differentiated with jizz, see <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4pXfHLUlZf4" title="youtube.com">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4pXfHLUlZf4</a> [youtube.com] for definition). Everything had the lable JIS in it including the package names, documentation, server names, job titles (JIS Expert was one of them).</p><p>It took us about 6 months before we could say JIS expert with a straight face, at which point we inflicted this humor on our clients during boardroom meetings, it was hilarious watching them not trying to crack.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We worked with a product who 's acronym was JIS ( when said , can not be differentiated with jizz , see http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = 4pXfHLUlZf4 [ youtube.com ] for definition ) .
Everything had the lable JIS in it including the package names , documentation , server names , job titles ( JIS Expert was one of them ) .It took us about 6 months before we could say JIS expert with a straight face , at which point we inflicted this humor on our clients during boardroom meetings , it was hilarious watching them not trying to crack .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We worked with a product who's acronym was JIS (when said, can not be differentiated with jizz, see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4pXfHLUlZf4 [youtube.com] for definition).
Everything had the lable JIS in it including the package names, documentation, server names, job titles (JIS Expert was one of them).It took us about 6 months before we could say JIS expert with a straight face, at which point we inflicted this humor on our clients during boardroom meetings, it was hilarious watching them not trying to crack.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30300348</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30300354</id>
	<title>SOA</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259610600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>SOA stands for same old architecture. Don't believe the hype.</htmltext>
<tokenext>SOA stands for same old architecture .
Do n't believe the hype .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>SOA stands for same old architecture.
Don't believe the hype.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30306376</id>
	<title>Re:Java!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259591760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Java is fat and gay.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Java is fat and gay .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Java is fat and gay.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30300210</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30300278</id>
	<title>I really have to get off my ass...</title>
	<author>H0p313ss</author>
	<datestamp>1259610300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>... and actually write my proposed book: "Software Design With Popular Acronyms"</htmltext>
<tokenext>... and actually write my proposed book : " Software Design With Popular Acronyms "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... and actually write my proposed book: "Software Design With Popular Acronyms"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30300616</id>
	<title>Re:I'll admit...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259611920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Aside from the familiarity of Java, what benefits would Java offer for web services?</p></div><p>Aside from having a huge library that helps you build your services, and a language that almost forces you to program well (A bad programmer can be bad in any language, but Java won't give you so many "liberties"), and... I guess you already see the point<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Aside from the familiarity of Java , what benefits would Java offer for web services ? Aside from having a huge library that helps you build your services , and a language that almost forces you to program well ( A bad programmer can be bad in any language , but Java wo n't give you so many " liberties " ) , and... I guess you already see the point ; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Aside from the familiarity of Java, what benefits would Java offer for web services?Aside from having a huge library that helps you build your services, and a language that almost forces you to program well (A bad programmer can be bad in any language, but Java won't give you so many "liberties"), and... I guess you already see the point ;)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30300258</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30300366</id>
	<title>Re:I'll admit...</title>
	<author>jhoegl</author>
	<datestamp>1259610660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>A smarter IT person would just disable USB ports or disable additional drive support.  So grats... grats on your ability to take a stupid prank and make it harm people because you are an idiot.</htmltext>
<tokenext>A smarter IT person would just disable USB ports or disable additional drive support .
So grats... grats on your ability to take a stupid prank and make it harm people because you are an idiot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A smarter IT person would just disable USB ports or disable additional drive support.
So grats... grats on your ability to take a stupid prank and make it harm people because you are an idiot.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30300258</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30300348</id>
	<title>SOA anecdote</title>
	<author>discord5</author>
	<datestamp>1259610540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In Dutch SOA stands for "Sexueel Overdraagbare Aandoening", or Sexually Transmitted Disease. Someone at my office recently received the prestigious title "SOA Expert", which of course has led to very strange looks from the mailman when a package arrives for him.</p><p>It's been several months, and the joke still hasn't gotten old, which shows either the level of inappropriateness of the title in Dutch or the maturity of the people making the joke. (I'm guessing the combination of both)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In Dutch SOA stands for " Sexueel Overdraagbare Aandoening " , or Sexually Transmitted Disease .
Someone at my office recently received the prestigious title " SOA Expert " , which of course has led to very strange looks from the mailman when a package arrives for him.It 's been several months , and the joke still has n't gotten old , which shows either the level of inappropriateness of the title in Dutch or the maturity of the people making the joke .
( I 'm guessing the combination of both )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In Dutch SOA stands for "Sexueel Overdraagbare Aandoening", or Sexually Transmitted Disease.
Someone at my office recently received the prestigious title "SOA Expert", which of course has led to very strange looks from the mailman when a package arrives for him.It's been several months, and the joke still hasn't gotten old, which shows either the level of inappropriateness of the title in Dutch or the maturity of the people making the joke.
(I'm guessing the combination of both)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30300450</id>
	<title>SOA is great but...</title>
	<author>fortapocalypse</author>
	<datestamp>1259611080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>SOA, Java, Axis 1... Did I take a time warp to 2003? Hard to believe that this would be of much interest these days. Also, CXF is a lot better than Axis, and who still uses Axis 1? Come on...</htmltext>
<tokenext>SOA , Java , Axis 1... Did I take a time warp to 2003 ?
Hard to believe that this would be of much interest these days .
Also , CXF is a lot better than Axis , and who still uses Axis 1 ?
Come on.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>SOA, Java, Axis 1... Did I take a time warp to 2003?
Hard to believe that this would be of much interest these days.
Also, CXF is a lot better than Axis, and who still uses Axis 1?
Come on...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30302608</id>
	<title>Re:I'll admit...</title>
	<author>harmonise</author>
	<datestamp>1259575860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>whoever puts in an IT Request about it gets fired.</p></div></blockquote><p>The first to get fired is the IT guy that didn't disable autorun on the company's computers.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>whoever puts in an IT Request about it gets fired.The first to get fired is the IT guy that did n't disable autorun on the company 's computers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>whoever puts in an IT Request about it gets fired.The first to get fired is the IT guy that didn't disable autorun on the company's computers.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30300258</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_02_1436250_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30310340
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30300258
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_02_1436250_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30306350
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30300308
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30300210
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_02_1436250_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30307996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30307870
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30302710
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30302112
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_02_1436250_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30300346
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30300258
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_02_1436250_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30307450
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30302112
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_02_1436250_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30305578
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30302710
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30302112
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_02_1436250_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30300652
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30300308
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30300210
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_02_1436250_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30300616
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30300258
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_02_1436250_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30304172
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30300354
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_02_1436250_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30305344
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30302710
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30302112
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_02_1436250_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30356996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30306376
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30300210
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_02_1436250_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30300426
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30300258
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_02_1436250_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30309006
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30300258
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_02_1436250_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30364246
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30300654
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_02_1436250_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30308192
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30300348
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_02_1436250_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30305470
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30300258
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_02_1436250_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30300366
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30300258
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_02_1436250_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30308780
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30300348
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_02_1436250_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30302608
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30300258
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_02_1436250.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30300258
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30302608
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30310340
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30300426
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30305470
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30300616
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30300346
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30309006
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30300366
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_02_1436250.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30300348
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30308192
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30308780
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_02_1436250.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30300370
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_02_1436250.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30300210
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30306376
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30356996
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30300308
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30306350
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30300652
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_02_1436250.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30300278
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_02_1436250.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30302116
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_02_1436250.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30300654
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30364246
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_02_1436250.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30301000
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_02_1436250.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30302112
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30307450
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30302710
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30305578
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30305344
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30307870
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30307996
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_02_1436250.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30300354
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_1436250.30304172
</commentlist>
</conversation>
