Denis Joseph Nexum Hardware.

Ide Ibm

Comparative Study on .NET and J2EE using Data mining--A Statistical Perspective

 2.Method

 A survey questionnaire was designed and was given to few corporate users who were using both of these technologies or either of these technologies. The questionnaire was based on previous comparative studies on these two platforms. These Questions are based on current scenarios.

 

3. The Questionnaire

 

The questionnaire [1]-[7] is as follows;

1. 1.      How satisfied are you with .NET/J2EE architecture?

a. Completely   b. Partially     c. Not at all

(Based on the n-tier architecture)

1. 2.      How best are the object oriented Concepts implemented in .NET/J2EE?

a. Completely   b. Partially     c. Not at all

1. 3.      How well the Support technologies are utilized in various applications of .NET/J2EE?
2. a.       Distribution protocol

a. Completely   b. Partially           c. Not at all

1. b.      Firewall

a. Completely   b. Partially           c. Not at all

1. c.       HTML page caching

a. Completely   b. Partially           c. Not at all

1. How effective are Presentation tier technologies of .NET/J2EE?
   1. Infrastructure

a. Completely   b. Partially     c. Not at all

1.  
   1. Programming model.

a. Completely   b. Partially     c. Not at all

1.  
   1. High availability

a. Completely   b. Partially     c. Not at all

1.  
   1. Load balancing

a. Completely   b. Partially     c. Not at all

1.  
   1. Management

a. Completely   b. Partially     c. Not at all

1. How best are the services provided by Middle tier technologies in .NET/J2EE?
   1. Infrastructure

a. Completely   b. Partially     c. Not at all

1.  
   1. Programming tool

a. Completely   b. Partially     c. Not at all

1.  
   1. High availability

a. Completely   b. Partially     c. Not at all

1.  
   1. Load balancing

a. Completely   b. Partially     c. Not at all

1.  
   1. Security API

a. Completely   b. Partially     c. Not at all

1.  
   1. Message Queue API

a. Completely   b. Partially     c. Not at all

1.  
   1. Asynchronous/synchronous components

a. Completely   b. Partially     c. Not at all

1.  
   1. Naming and Directory Service

a. Completely   b. Partially     c. Not at all

1. How reliable are Data tier technologies in .NET/J2EE?
   1. Distributed transaction

a. Completely   b. Partially     c. Not at all

1.  
   1. Relational DB API

a. Completely   b. Partially     c. Not at all

1.  
   1. Hierarchical DB API

a. Completely   b. Partially     c. Not at all

1.  
   1. Database storage

a. Completely   b. Partially     c. Not at all

1.  
   1. Mainframe DB connectivity

a. Completely   b. Partially     c. Not at all

1. What is ease of use of Frame Work Technologies in .NET/J2EE?
   1. 1.0

a. Completely   b. Partially     c. Not at all

1.  
   1. 1.1

a. Completely   b. Partially     c. Not at all

1.  
   1. 2.0

a. Completely   b. Partially     c. Not at all

1.  
   1. 3.0

a. Completely   b. Partially     c. Not at all

1.  
   1. 3.5

a. Completely   b. Partially     c. Not at all

1. What is overall maturity of .NET/J2EE technologies?

a. Completely   b. Partially     c. Not at all

1. How strong are the Interoperability and Web Services provided in .NET/J2EE?[1]

a. Completely   b. Partially     c. Not at all

1. How much scalable are the applications developed through .NET/J2EE?

a. Completely   b. Partially     c. Not at all

1. How best is the framework support provided in .NET/J2EE for e-commerce & telecom solutions?[5]

a. Completely   b. Partially     c. Not at all

1. How simple is the language used in developing .NET/J2EE applications?

a. Completely   b. Partially     c. Not at all

1. How portable are the applications in .NET/J2EE?

a. Completely   b. Partially     c. Not at all

1. How effective is the Client device independence in .NET/J2EE applications?

a. Completely   b. Partially     c. Not at all

1. What is cost of developing applications using .NET/J2EE?[7]

a. High   b. Medium    c. Low

1. What is the performance level of developing applications in .NET/J2EE?[6]

a. High   b. Medium    c. Low

 

4. People who responded to the Questionnaire were:

 

1. Mr.Nallathiga Murali Krishna-IBM Hyderabad working on j2EE Platform since 5 years
2. Mr.Madabhushi Srikanth- IBM Hyderabad working on j2EE Platform since 5 years
3. Mr.Vinay Chilakamarri-IBM Hyderabad working on j2ee  Platform since 3 years (from USA)
4. Mr. Krishna Kishore - InfoSys Hyderabad working on .NET Platform since 3 years
5. Mr. Praveen Kumar- InfoSys Hyderabad working on .NET Platform since 3 years
6. Mr.Padala Ravindra-Mahindra Satyam Pune, working on j2ee platform since 5 years
7. Ms.Chandana-InfoSys Hyderabad working on .NET Platform since 3 years
8. Ms.PadmaLatha- InfoSys Hyderabad working on .NET Platform since 3 years

 

 

 

5.The Responses:

 

 

%ages

.net

j2ee

Complete

0.59

0.63

Partial

0.38

0.33

Notatall

0.01

0.05

 

 

Complete

Partial

Notatall

Total

.NET

103

66

2

171

J2EE

110

57

8

175

Total

213

123

10

346

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

6. Applying Naive Bayes Classification [8]

 

Prior probability of .net being satisfied= 103/346=0.28

Prior probability of j2ee being satisfied=110/346=0.31

 

Likelihood of .net being satisfied= 0.59

Likelihood of j2ee being satisfied=0.63

 

Probability of .net being satisfied=103/213=0.48

Probability of j2ee being satisfied=110/213=0.51

 

Posterior probability of .net being satisfied=0.28*0.59=0.17

Posterior probability of j2ee being satisfied=0.31*0.63=0.20

 

Finally we can conclude that j2ee satisfaction is little bit on the higher side than .net. But the difference being negligible we can conclude that both are doing well for corporate

.

 

The above table is the response summary of the 8 respondents from different reputed MNCs from India; All the executives are using their respective platforms since 3-5 years. Incase of .NET out of 175 answers 103 responses state that they are completely satisfied with the platform and 110 responses on J2EE platform.66 responses indicate that they are partially satisfied with .NET platform and 57 responses indicate that they are partially satisfied with J2EE platform. Not at all satisfied responses are negligible in both the cases. Completely satisfied are 59% in case of .NET and 63% in case of J2EE.38% of the responses are partially satisfied in case of .NET and 33% in case of J2EE.

 

From the above responses one can conclude that the users are very much satisfied in case of both of the platforms and J2EE being slightly higher in this case. This indicates the concepts in J2EE are more clearly visible to the user than in case of .NET.

 

The answers for Questions 3b-Firewall, 5a-Infrastucture, 6e-Mainframe DB Connectivity, and framework in latest versions are not upto the satisfactory level of the users. On both the platforms the users are not fully satisfied with the firewall security, infrastructure and Mainframe DB connectivity. Hence both the platforms need a considerable amount of improvement in these cases. The users are also not fully satisfied with the framework of the latest versions on both the platforms.

 

Also the cost of developing an application should still come in case of both the platforms as per the opinion of the developers. (QNo 15)

 

From the observations .NET was more easy to use than J2EE.While J2EE had a number of IDEs than .NET. The users of J2EE were very much happy to have a number of IDEs since they can pick any one of those depending on their interest. Even if all the IDEs got corrupted in their system they had the option of windows editor or notepad where they can write the code and execute it without any difficulty. Whereas this facility is not there in case of .NET.Regadring the design of the IDE; .NET IDE had a better design than J2EE.J2EE design is clumsy than .NET.

 

 

7. Probabilities:                                                

 

 

.NET

%

pComplete

0.59

58.86

pPartial

0.38

37.71

pNot at all

0.01

1.14

No response

0.0025

0.25

 

j2EE

%

PComplete

0.63

62.86

Ppartial

0.33

32.57

pNot at all

0.05

4.57

No response

0.0094

0.94

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8.  Responses Summary:

                                                                                                         

 

Complete

Partial

Notatall

Total

.NET

103

66

2

171

J2EE

110

57

8

175

 

213

123

10

346

 

 

 

 

 

 

From the response summaries the following graphs were plotted and their probabilities were taken. Probabilities have been taken in order to calculate naïve Bayesian classifiers.

 

 

9. Graphs on the results:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10. Conclusions:

While .NET and J2EE go hand in hand in many corporates there will be a stage that .Net is likely to dominate J2EE because of its ease of use and one can build faster   applications than J2EE.We can also apply MUSA(MultiCriteria User Satisfaction Analysis) method in order to find out how satisfied are with each platform and compare them.

 

References:

[1]   The great debate:  J2EE vs. .Net- Does one Web services platform dominate the other? By Jonathan Lurie and R. Jason Belanger, JavaWorld.com, 03/08/02- http://www.javaworld.com/javaworld/jw-03-2002/jw-0308-j2eenet.html

[2]   Microsoft .NET vs. J2EE: How Do They Stack Up?

[3]   J2EE vs. Microsoft.NET -A comparison of building XML-based web services-By Chad Vawter and Ed Roman June 2001, Prepared for Sun Microsystems, Inc.

[4]   J2EE vs. .NET-How One ISV Made the Choice-White Paper

[5]   Java 2 Enterprise Edition (J2EE)  versus The .NET Platform - Two Visions for eBusiness-By Roger Sessions,ObjectWatch, Inc.March 28, 2001

[6]   J2EE / .Net Smack down-Cedric Beust-November 19th, 2002

[7]   Rumble in the jungle: J2EE versus .Net, Part 1-How do J2EE and Microsoft's .Net compare in enterprise environments? -By Humphrey Sheil and Michael Monteiro,JavaWorld.com, 06/28/02

[8]   Data Mining : Concepts and Techniques,2nd Edition Jiawei Han and Micheline Kamber-Elsevier-Morgan Kaufmann Publishers

 

 

 

* Dr.RSD Waidabanu is HOD of ECE Dept Govt.College of Engineering,Salem;VVN Kumar, Faculty nformatics,Alluri Institute of Management Sciences,Warangal.

About the Author

 

Dr.RSD Waidabanu,Professor & HOD CSE,Salem College of Engineering,

Tamil Nadu

V V Narendra Kumar-MS(Software Systems),MTech(IT),[Phd]

Associate Professor,Informatics,

Alluri Institute of Management Sciences,Warangal,A.P.

IBM 24x - IDE - Internal 33P3231 $11.59 IBM 24x - IDE - Internal 33P3231

IBM 48x - IDE - Internal 39M3511 $11.59 IBM 48x - IDE - Internal 39M3511

IBM IDE/SATA Interposer Card 42C1438 $43.34 IBM IDE/SATA Interposer Card 42C1438

IBM IDE To SATA DVD Interposer Card 49Y5230 $52.46 IBM IDE To SATA DVD Interposer Card 49Y5230

40GB IBM IDE ATA-100 7200RPM 19K1568 $34.68 40GB IBM IDE ATA-100 7200RPM 19K1568

40GB IDE IBM 4200RPM 9.5mm 1.8" 39T2697 $139.1 40GB IDE IBM 4200RPM 9.5mm 1.8" 39T2697

IBM x335 System Board IDE/SCSI (400MHz) Replaces 48P9077 88P9729 $22.82 IBM x335 System Board IDE/SCSI (400MHz) Replaces 48P9077 88P9729

IBM FRU IDE Hard Disk Cable ATA 37L4525 $3.99 IBM FRU IDE Hard Disk Cable ATA 37L4525

20GB IBM Deskstar 60GXP IDE 7200RPM 3.5" 07N6652 $18.26 20GB IBM Deskstar 60GXP IDE 7200RPM 3.5" 07N6652

IBM IDE/SATA Interposer Card w/O Mnf Warranty 43W4978 $49.04 IBM IDE/SATA Interposer Card w/O Mnf Warranty 43W4978

60GB IDE IBM ATA-100 4200RPM 2MB 1.8in 39T2807 $111.74 60GB IDE IBM ATA-100 4200RPM 2MB 1.8in 39T2807

IBM x335 System Board IDE/SCSI (400MHz) 26K3103 $25.1 IBM x335 System Board IDE/SCSI (400MHz) 26K3103

48x24x48x16 IDE LG IBM CDR-W DVD Combo GCC-4482B $19.93 48x24x48x16 IDE LG IBM CDR-W DVD Combo GCC-4482B

40GB IDE IBM ATA-100 5400RPM 40pin 2.5in 71P7502 $63.68 40GB IDE IBM ATA-100 5400RPM 40pin 2.5in 71P7502

40GB IDE IBM ATA-100 5400RPM 2.5" 19K1692 $74.44 40GB IDE IBM ATA-100 5400RPM 2.5" 19K1692

20GB IDE IBM Travelstar 9.5mm 4200RPM ATA-5 IC25N020ATMR040 $18.92 20GB IDE IBM Travelstar 9.5mm 4200RPM ATA-5 IC25N020ATMR040

30GB IDE IBM Travelstar 80GN 4200RPM 2MB ATA-5 9.5mm IC25N030ATMR04 $26.99 30GB IDE IBM Travelstar 80GN 4200RPM 2MB ATA-5 9.5mm IC25N030ATMR04

40GB IDE IBM Travelstar 40GNX 5400RPM 8MB 9.5mm IC25N040ATCS05-0 08K1092 $38.92 40GB IDE IBM Travelstar 40GNX 5400RPM 8MB 9.5mm IC25N040ATCS05-0 08K1092

40GB IDE IBM Travelstar 80GN 4200RPM 9.5mm IC25N040ATMR04 $36.92 40GB IDE IBM Travelstar 80GN 4200RPM 9.5mm IC25N040ATMR04

48x LG / IBM CD-ROM IDE Drive Beige CRD-8481B $8.45 48x LG / IBM CD-ROM IDE Drive Beige CRD-8481B

120GB IDE IBM Deskstar 180GXP 7200RPM ATA-100 2MB IC35L120AVV207-0 IC35L120AVV207-1 $20.96 120GB IDE IBM Deskstar 180GXP 7200RPM ATA-100 2MB IC35L120AVV207-0 IC35L120AVV207-1

120GB IDE IBM Deskstar 180GXP 7200RPM ATA-100 2MB 08K0836 $22.06 120GB IDE IBM Deskstar 180GXP 7200RPM ATA-100 2MB 08K0836

24x 8x IBM Optical Drive DVD-ROM/CD-RW Slim CD / DVD IDE Black Internal 42R7968 $58.16 24x 8x IBM Optical Drive DVD-ROM/CD-RW Slim CD / DVD IDE Black Internal 42R7968

IBM eServer 326m 7969 RM Server Opteron 270 2GHz 1GB RAID/IDE CD-ROM LAN 796955U $128.32 IBM eServer 326m 7969 RM Server Opteron 270 2GHz 1GB RAID/IDE CD-ROM LAN 796955U

IBM eServer XSeries 336 Xeon 2.8GHz/2MB Ram 1GB SCSI IDE DVD LAN Fast Gig Rack 883705U $90.56 IBM eServer XSeries 336 Xeon 2.8GHz/2MB Ram 1GB SCSI IDE DVD LAN Fast Gig Rack 883705U

IBM x335 System Board IDE/SCSI (400MHz) Sub 88P9729 48P9077 73P6599 $29.66 IBM x335 System Board IDE/SCSI (400MHz) Sub 88P9729 48P9077 73P6599

IBM 39T2505 Plug-in Module CD/DVD Combo Drive - CD-RW/DVD-ROM Support - 8x Read/ - IDE $19.51 IBM 39T2505 Plug-in Module CD/DVD Combo Drive - CD-RW/DVD-ROM Support - 8x Read/ - IDE

8x8x24 Teac CD-W28E CD-RW Notebook IDE Drive For IBM ThinkPad Notebooks (Black) $17.08 8x8x24 Teac CD-W28E CD-RW Notebook IDE Drive For IBM ThinkPad Notebooks (Black)

24x IBM IDE CD-ROM Plus UltraBay Enhanced Drive Black 42C0963 $5.42 24x IBM IDE CD-ROM Plus UltraBay Enhanced Drive Black 42C0963

30GB IDE Hitachi IBM Travelstar 80GN 4200RPM 2MB ATA-5 9.5mm IC25N030ATMR04-0 $26.99 30GB IDE Hitachi IBM Travelstar 80GN 4200RPM 2MB ATA-5 9.5mm IC25N030ATMR04-0

120GB IDE IBM Deskstar 120GXP 7200RPM 2MB 07N8086 IC35L120AVVA07-0 Hard Drive Internal $20.3 120GB IDE IBM Deskstar 120GXP 7200RPM 2MB 07N8086 IC35L120AVVA07-0 Hard Drive Internal

IBM eServer XSeries 260 8865 RM Server Xeon MP 3.16GHz 2GB SCSI/IDE CD-ROM LAN 88651RU $379.8 IBM eServer XSeries 260 8865 RM Server Xeon MP 3.16GHz 2GB SCSI/IDE CD-ROM LAN 88651RU

IBM eServer 326m Opteron 2.8GHz/2MB Ram 1GB RAID IDE CD LAN EN Fast EN Gig EN Rack 7969PAN $145.94 IBM eServer 326m Opteron 2.8GHz/2MB Ram 1GB RAID IDE CD LAN EN Fast EN Gig EN Rack 7969PAN

IBM eServer XSeries 225 Xeon 2.4GHz/512KB Ram 512MB RAID PCI-X/100MHz IDE PCI FDD CD LAN Gig EN Tower 86475AXB4 $282.66 IBM eServer XSeries 225 Xeon 2.4GHz/512KB Ram 512MB RAID PCI-X/100MHz IDE PCI FDD CD LAN Gig EN Tower 86475AXB4

IBM System x3650 Xeon 2.66GHz/4MB Ram 2GB SAS PCI-E IDE CD-RW/DVD LAN Gig EN Rack 79796AUB7 $223.38 IBM System x3650 Xeon 2.66GHz/4MB Ram 2GB SAS PCI-E IDE CD-RW/DVD LAN Gig EN Rack 79796AUB7

IBM BladeCenter Chassis 14x High-Availability Midplane Bays FDD 8x 24x IDE DVD-ROM 2x2000W PS 7U Rail Kit 86773XUB6 $145.66 IBM BladeCenter Chassis 14x High-Availability Midplane Bays FDD 8x 24x IDE DVD-ROM 2x2000W PS 7U Rail Kit 86773XUB6

IBM eServer XSeries 336 Xeon 3.2GHz/1MB Ram 1GB SATA IDE Ultra ATA-100 DVD-W LAN Gig EN Rack 8837PBKB5 $86.58 IBM eServer XSeries 336 Xeon 3.2GHz/1MB Ram 1GB SATA IDE Ultra ATA-100 DVD-W LAN Gig EN Rack 8837PBKB5

IBM eServer 326m Opteron 2.8GHz/1MB Ram 1GB RAID IDE CD LAN EN Fast EN Gig EN Rack 796991U $120.9 IBM eServer 326m Opteron 2.8GHz/1MB Ram 1GB RAID IDE CD LAN EN Fast EN Gig EN Rack 796991U