J2EE

[bob smith]

I see a lot of jobs for J2EE programmers.

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

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

Thanks.

 

[Lew]

I see a lot of jobs for J2EE programmers.

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

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

No.

Both are free, and both cost a lot.

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

By using free implementations.

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

Are you an "Average Joe"?

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

 

[Arne Vajhøj]

I see a lot of jobs for J2EE programmers.

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

No.

Java SE is the language and the basic libraries.

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

(J2SE and J2EE acronyms has been replaces)

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

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

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

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

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

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

Arne

 

[markspace]

I see a lot of jobs for J2EE programmers.

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

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

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

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

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

 

[Arne Vajhøj]

I see a lot of jobs for J2EE programmers.

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

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

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

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

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

That should cover the web profile pretty well.

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

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

Arne

 

[Jukka Lahtinen]

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

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

 

[Gordon Levi]

I see a lot of jobs for J2EE programmers.

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

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

Thanks.

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

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

 

[Arved Sandstrom]

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

Does it really matter? I still occasionally lapse and call it J2EE
because I used it for years when it was called that. The people who I
need to talk to in the course of my work know what I mean if I use the
older term.

AHS

 

[Arved Sandstrom]

I see a lot of jobs for J2EE programmers.

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

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

Thanks.

You need to look at job descriptions with an idea as to what problem
they need solved, not so much the technology involved. You can be a Java
EE expert but still fall flat on your face if you don't get the business
logic.

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

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

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

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

AHS

 

[Arne Vajhøj]

Does it really matter? I still occasionally lapse and call it J2EE
because I used it for years when it was called that. The people who I
need to talk to in the course of my work know what I mean if I use the
older term.

It is not the biggest issue in the world.

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

Arne

 

[Arne Vajhøj]

Having said that, the whole business of differentiations of the Java
platform is awkward and unfortunate.

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

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

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

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

Arne

 

[EricF]

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


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

Arne

Arved may have been referring to jsp/servlets? I think jdbc has moved to SE.
Personally I think you can do a lot of serious work without JEE,
professionally you are likely to need JSP or servlets. (Spring can handle
much of the JEE functionality.)

Eric

 

[Arne Vajhøj]

Arved may have been referring to jsp/servlets? I think jdbc has moved to SE.
Personally I think you can do a lot of serious work without JEE,
professionally you are likely to need JSP or servlets. (Spring can handle
much of the JEE functionality.)

Most of JDBC has always been in SE.

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

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

Arne

 

[EricF]

Arved may have been referring to jsp/servlets? I think jdbc has moved to SE.
Personally I think you can do a lot of serious work without JEE,
professionally you are likely to need JSP or servlets. (Spring can handle
much of the JEE functionality.)

Eric

What was I thinking? JDBC has been in SE for a long time.

Eric

 

[Arne Vajhøj]

FWIW, I mainly use SE Java to write the sort of stuff I'd formerly do in
C, i.e. to get more portability and to take advantage of the larger
standard class library and Swing and friends. The only stuff I've needed
that hasn't been in SE was javamail

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

Arne

 

[Arved Sandstrom]

Arved may have been referring to jsp/servlets? I think jdbc has moved to SE.
Personally I think you can do a lot of serious work without JEE,
professionally you are likely to need JSP or servlets. (Spring can handle
much of the JEE functionality.)

Eric

Well, partially, Eric. But when you look at all the javax.* APIs, it's
pretty clear that there's a lot of stuff that no Java app can do without
using libraries that implement Java EE specs. Not just servlets/JSPs
either, obviously.

I get the impression that way back in the day some Sun people decided
that Internet APIs == enterprise. And the marketing folks wanted
branding. I really don't see the sense of a lot of these distinctions.

AHS

 

[Arne Vajhøj]

Fair comment.

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

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

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

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

Arne

 

[Wendy Devolder]

I wouldn't say that the difference between J2SE and J2EE is that the lattercosts a lot. Rather, there is a different purpose for using either.

 

[Arved Sandstrom]

Fair comment.

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

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

There's a grey area between using JDBC directly, or using JPA. Sometimes
- legitimately - the data in your relational DB may just not map well to
objects, ORM or no ORM. Maybe you just need three coums out of some
godawful table that is seriously non-relational. JDBC is good for that.

OTOH, the JDBC API wastes my time. I don't mean that it's bad, I mean
that it's relatively low level. Compared to JPA I just have to spend
more of my time getting and modifying data than I do with JPA. This is
the whole point of an ORM solution.

AHS

 

[Arne Vajhøj]

Noted. Its unlikely I'd ever use it for that, but the deploy/update
software aspects may be useful fairly soon. As far as the server
communication aspects go, PHP will most likely do everything I'd need.
This is fortunate since my web host supports PHP doesn't support anything
specifically Java-related.

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

works fine for client/server communication.

I would not use it for deploy/update.

Arne