Platforms and tools for Web Services and Mobile
Applications
FUTURE
Bent Thomsen
Aalborg University
3rd and 4th of June 2004
1
Services on Demand Vision
Array of Access Devices Converged
Networks / Broadcast
Cheap, Faster, Global
Networking via Internet
Cheap, +
Faster Processing
interactivity
=
Revolutionary new
business methods
Interactive Unlimited choice
Digital Content
Individual is King
But how to build this vision? 2
The Answer is: Web Services
• A Web service is like a Web site without a user interface, that serves programs
instead of people.
• Instead of getting requests from browsers and returning web pages in response,
a web service:
– receives a request formatted in XML from an application,
– performs a task,
– and returns an XML-formatted response.
• Web Services are delivered using open industry standards
– Services to be described in WSDL
– Services to located via UDDI
– Data to be exchanged via XML
– Protocols are HTTP and SOAP
• BUT Back-end systems still need to be developed!
3
The basic problem ...
• If you have software components ...
• ... and they shall work together in the same transaction
• ... and they shall have the same security boundaries
• ... and they shall share the same session state
• ... and they shall be remotely accessible
• ... and they shall not suffer from code overload
• Then you must have ...
• ... an infrastructure that hosts such components for
secure remote and local access
• ... an infrastructure that manages transactions
• ... an infrastructure that hides infrastructure code
• The answer is:
• Applications on Application Servers
• Implemented in an Enterprise Solution Framework 4
Sun One Architecture
Support major standards initiatives such as XML, SOAP, UDDI, WDSL
and … to make it ready for developers who want to take advantage of
the Services on Demand vision 5
Microsoft’s .NET
Support major standards initiatives such as XML, SOAP, UDDI, WDSL
and … to make it ready for developers who want to take advantage of
the Services on Demand vision 6
What is Microsoft .Net?
• It is a vision
– The platform for the digital future
– „.NET is Microsoft‟s platform for a new computing model
built around XML Web Services‟
Microsoft Corporation Annual Report, 2001
• It is a brand name
– Applied to many things
• It is a set of products and technologies
– Infrastructure
– Tools
– Servers
– Services
• .Net is Microsoft‟s core business Strategy
7
.NET Technologies
• The .NET Framework
– The CLR with support for XML Web services and more
– Supporting Visual Basic.NET, C#, C++, and more
• The .Net development tools
– Visual Studio.Net
• The .NET Enterprise Servers
– BizTalk Server 2003, SQL Server 2003, Commerce Server
2003 and more
• The .Net Services
– Passport, My Services, bCentral, expedia and more
8
What is Java?
• The Java programming language
– Took the world by storm in 1995 when introduced with the
HotJava web Browser
– Quickly integrated with Netscape browser
– Now in Version 1.4
– Coming soon Version 1.5
• The Java Virtual Machine (JVM)
– Now comes in many different flavours
9
J2EE – Enterprise Java
• J2EE: Java 2 Enterprise Edition
– Superset of Java 2 Standard Edition (J2SE)
– Adds enterprise features to Java Libraries
• Defined through the Java Community Process (JCP)
– plus whatever Sun sees fit, Sun has last word
– Sun writes almost all specs and other contribute
– Submitters essentially surrender all rights to Sun
• Wholly owned property of Sun Microsystems
– Licensing controlled by Sun, by Sun's rules
– JCP Broadens Sun's architect's base
10
Enterprise Java
• J2EE (1.4+) is an infrastructure specification for:
– Components ("Beans")
– Data Source Connectivity
– XML and Messaging
– Web Pages and Web Services
• Implemented by: Sun, IBM, BEA, Oracle, etc.
– IBM WebSphere (37% market share 2002/33% 2000)
– BEA WebLogic (29% MS 2002/59% 2000)
– SUN iPlanet (4% MS 2002/3% 2000)
– Oracle Application Server 9i
– Fujitsu Interstage
– …
Numbers from the web, allegedly originally from Gartner DataQuest
• All vendors implement core specification, but:
– Some areas in J2EE are (intentionally) not specified
– The more specific a functionality the more proprietary the implementation gets
11
A typical .NET Enterprise Solution
IIS on W2k Server
Browser .NET SQL
ASP managed Server
.NET component
Windows
Client
12
A typical J2EE Enterprise Solution
Java App
Server DB
Browser
Servlet Server
EJB
JSP
Java
Client
13
J2EE Solutions vs Microsoft .Net Solutions
– Both multi-tiered, similar computing technologies
– Both support “standards”
– Both offer different tools & ways to achieve the same
goal.
– A lot of parallelism can be seen.
– Very difficult to compare and qualify the comparison
because each has its own advantages &
disadvantages.
14
The TMC Petshop Performance Case Study
• Java Pet Store is Sun‟s primary blueprint application for J2EE
• The .NET Petshop is a port of the J2EE Java Pet Store to .NET
• In the TMC Petshop Performance Case Study, The Middleware
Company implemented both the Java Pet Store and the .Net
Petshop
• First version showed .Net 28 times faster than J2EE
• Second version showed some J2EE implementation equal .Net
• Second version is a testimony to performance tuning
15
What do these comparisons tell us?
• It is very difficult to make such comparisons
• That .Net has gained maturity extremely fast
• That the two frameworks are very similar
• You will not be sacked for choosing the right J2EE
application server ;-)
• The Devil is in the detail
– C# is not Java
– ADO.NET is not JDBC
– CLR is not JVM
16
J2EE 1.5
• J2EE (1.5) preview of 26.4.2004
– Focus on ease of development
• Generics and metadata as in J2SE 1.5 (more like C#)
• Java Studio Creator tool (in beta from April 2004) (more
like Visual Studio .Net)
– Timeframe
• To be discussed at JavaOne in June
• Finalized in approximately one year
– IBM push for truly open source Java
– Others hesitate (even Open Source JBoss)
17
What about mobile?
• Web Services are fine as n-tier applications with UI
provided through browser, but …
• On mobile devices WAP hasn‟t really caught on
• Even iMode hasn‟t caught on in Europe
• xHTML is looking promising though
• Renewed Thin/Thick client discussion
• Java applications on Mobile devices are reasonably
successful
• Now Microsoft is moving fast into the field with .Net
Compact Framework
18
Two Devices
Nokia 6600 Orange SPV E200
19
Two Devices
Motorola V525 Motorola MPx200
20
Two Devices
21
Building Mobile Solutions is harder
• Mobile device
– Software infrastructure, hardware requirements
• Communication technology
– On-/Offline scenario
– Wireless Wide Area Networks/ Wireless Local Area Networks
– Communication protocol
• Application architecture scenario
– Thin/fat client
• Data management
– Synchronisation
– On-/offline capabilities
• Security issues
– Dangers for mobile devices
– Threats of communication technology
– Danger of exposing enterprise data
22
Therefore ...
The Java vs. Net discussion goes mobile
• Java 2 Micro Edition (J2ME) is not ONE Java edition
• An J2ME compliant application consists of
– Configuration
– Profile (e.g. Personal, Mobile Information Device Profile (MIDP))
– Application code
– Vendor specific UI
• 3 Contenders to compare
– Java 2 Micro Edition – Connected Device Configuration (CDC)
– Java 2 Micro Edition – Connected Limited Device Configuration
(CLDC)
– Microsoft .NET Compact Framework
23
Student Project
• Group of Master Level Students (Hovedfag)
– Bjørn D. Rasmussen
– Casper S. Jensen
– Jimmy Nielsen
– Lasse Jensen
• Collaboration with DEIF
• Project Goals
– Build end-to-end mobile client, wireless, webservices based
application with back-end interface to SCADA
– In Java (J2ME/J2EE) and in .Net
– Compare the two solutions on a set of criteria
24
Basis of comparison
Objective measurements Subjective measurements
• Lines of code • Developer satisfaction
• Development tools • End-user satisfaction
• Documentation
• Infrastructure
• Performance
• Architectural pattern
• Security
• Price
• Development time
25
DEIF M-Vision
(SCADA up and running in 30 minutes)
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
Subjective Measures
• Developer satisfaction
– VS.NET integrates web service and mobile application
development far better than any Java IDE
– A subset of an API is a better solution for mobile devices
instead of an entirely new API
• End-user satisfaction
– DEIF would choose a .NET based solution since startup time
is very important
– DEIF only needs a limited number of IDE licenses
– Extra price for a SmartPhone 2003 is insignificant compared
to the value it gives
– The SmartPhone 2003 is more ”fancy” than the Java phones
34
Students Conclusions
• We see .NET as a better designed framework because:
– it eliminates the language barrier while also being platform
independent
– it makes only little distinction between desktop and mobile
application development
• Sun‟s application server performance is very poor compared to
IIS.
• License fees for a Java based solution are cheaper but .NET might
catch up when considering development time
• We tried a combined .NET and Java solution but this has shown
to be very troublesome!
35
My conclusions
• The two worlds are becoming more and more similar
– But it seems that you have to work harder in Java than in .Net
– .Net is currently driving technology transfer from Research to
Product
• Windows generation at University now
• Watch-out in the mobile world
• Vodafone to offer Microsoft Smart phones
– http://msmobiles.com/news.php/2504.html
– Fed-up with Nokia promoting own brand, rather than operator
brand
36
To .Net or not to .Net
Choosing between Java and .Net
• The ultimate choice usually depends not on
technical superiority, but on:
– cultural/”religious”/political preferences
– Customer preference
– Vendor relations
– Skill set of your developers
• You are most likely to be developing in
both environments for the foreseeable future
• Look out for “The third way”
– Linux, Apache, MySQL, PhP, …
37
Beyond the short term
• Will somebody come up with a killer application?
• J2EE/J2ME or .Net/.Net CF are reasonably coherent,
but maybe we will see a completely new platform
• Network operators seem reluctant to move to 3G
• And what about 4G?
38
An example: Ericsson roadmap to 4G
Ericsson defines 4G very broadly as seamless mobility for the
user + all possible new infrastructure technologies
39
Inter-Working
Billing SIP Proxy Signalling WAP Accounting ISP
VHE Server Gateway
The
Internet
Satellite FES
Context-aware information
Centre
IP backbone
Broadcast Networks
(DAB, DVB-T)
GSM /
GPRS
UMTS
IP-based
micro-mobility Wireless
LANs
40
We talk about 4G today because the future is open
•The term 3G was coined at academic conferences around 1990.
Then 3G meant everything beyond GSM
•One (dropped) 3G vision was mobility by wireless, + personal
phone-numbers, following the individual globally at closest fixed line
•Later the ”1G”, ”2G”, ”3G” terminology was captured by equipment
vendors in the mid 90s for selling UMTS to the market and regulators
Anybody remember the hype around 4G and 5G programming
languages in the 80s ?
Will anybody talk about ”4G ” in 2010? I’m sceptical
41
Next Innovation “S – Curve” - Mobile
MATURITY
% Adoption Cascading S-Curves
GROWTH
Web Mobile
Mainframe PC
E-commerce Solutions
Minicomputer Client-Server
E-business Web Services
(30 years) (15 years)
(7+ years)
(?)
INNOVATION
Time
80’s 90’s 00 05
Issue: How and When should firms make the shift
from the E-Business “S curve” to Mobile?
42
The Tale of Two Perspectives
Business Value, ROI
Enterprise and Application
Customer Deployment Issues!
Focus Not Technology
Selling mobile
technology hype
Mobile
Selling unrealistic
Vendor solutions e.g., m-
Focus commerce portals
Vendors are ignoring customers demands: show me
how to make or save money using mobile?
43
Future Dreams anno 1993
44