免费注册 查看新帖 |

Chinaunix

  平台 论坛 博客 文库
123
最近访问板块 发新帖
楼主: mygod
打印 上一主题 下一主题

[学习分享] [转帖]Weblogic VS Websphere(偏向Websphere) [复制链接]

论坛徽章:
1
荣誉版主
日期:2011-11-23 16:44:17
21 [报告]
发表于 2002-12-26 09:22 |只看该作者

[转帖]Weblogic VS Websphere(偏向Websphere)

转IBM打BEA的报告

BEA WebLogic Server的缺陷
1. WebLogic没有整体方案,只是运行产品
多数客户只对电子商务应用的整体方案感兴趣。从整体方案的角度看, BEA远远落后于IBM。
BEA: BEA只有单一运行产品,没有完善的服务机制。当涉及到“快速开发应用”或“管理开发环境”时,客户只能与BEA的合作伙伴联系。然而,它的合作伙伴没有一起协作的经验;第三方产品工具往往不支持BEA的产品。当采用BEA的产品与其它产品合在一起作方案时,客户需要大量手工开发工作。出错时很难查出是那一家产品有问题。客户需要周旋于多家厂商之间。
IBM: IBM提供全套集成的方案和产品,用于WEB应用开发的整个周期。开发阶段:Visual Age for Java, Websphere Visual Studio, SanFrancisco;运行阶段:Websphere标准版、高级版和企业版,Domino, DB2;管理和安全设施阶段:Tivoli,SecureWay相关产品;扩充和调试:Performance Pack, Site Analyzer。由此看出,IBM具有开发WEB应用的全系列产品,而且紧密集成。
2. WebLogic与标准相符的程度较弱
Websphere Application Server对J2EE的支持:10个API支持, 2 API由其它IBM产品支持,2个API不支持。Weblogic Server对J2EE的支持:6个API支持, 2 个API不完全支持,6个API不支持。
RMI/IIOP是Websphere高级版自带的协议,企业版也支持。而WebLogic Server使用其特有的T3协议。
WebLogic不提供任何XML API,而IBM拥有业界最好的XML技术。
3. WebLogic没有统一的编程模型
BEA: BEA的产品收购于DEC, Novell, WebLogic, NCR和其它小公司,不能很好集成。BEA造成客户要使用三种不同的编程模型,即:(1) 用过程化的C语言编写Tuxedo应用, (2) 用Java/C++ 编写WebLogic Enterprise CORBA 应用和 (3) Java EJB 编写WebLogic Server 应用。它们之间不能转换,不能移植,不能扩充,不能共享安全,没有集成,整个产品没有按照这些要求设计。
IBM: e-business 应用框架提供了统一的编程模型,它以Java技术为基础,贯穿企业应用的各个层面。IBM的方案支持广泛的客户端,充分保护Java技术的投资、可重用模块和现有的企业资产。当客户选择了这样的框架后,它们也就选择了策略性的方法和工具,而不是单一的产品和方案。
4. WebLogic开发环境弱,需要许多手工编程
VisualAge for Java与Websphere集成较好,而与WebLogic集成需要较多手工编程。例如,VisualAge for Java和WebSphere Studio有许多wizards可直接生成HTML页面,servlet code生成控制器,Java Bean或Enterprise Java Bean形成商业逻辑,最终JSP页面用于显示。只需几分钟就可生成这些,包括修改HTML和JSP、为EJB生成测试客户端、跟踪servlet, EJB, JSP等。
另一个问题是使用第三方产品时,不能保证这种合作方式的长期性。例如BEA 过去与Inprise合作,现在Inprise有自己的应用服务器和开发人员,它在开发WebLogic应用时有一些问题。而这种事情不可能发生在WebSphere上。
采用IBM方案带来更多的商业价值,这才是许多客户需要IBM的原因。
BEA: 企业级上缺少足够的集成开发环境,依赖于第三方开发工具的支持,增加了成本,对客户讲延长了开发周期。开发环境缺少小组开发的支持和企业的连接性支持。
IBM: IBM的WebSphere开发环境以IBM的 VisualAge 家族开发工具为基础,提供强壮的基于部件的产品,保证高性能和企业范围的分布式系统。Websphere同时提供对第三方Java开发工具的支持。
5. WebLogic应用集成较弱(CICS/390, IMS, Encina, MQSeries, Domino, etc.) ,需要手工编程
WebSphere能很好的于现有应用集成。WebSphere企业版支持EJB与关系型数据库连接以及CICS/IMS。WebSphere企业可基于TCP/IP、SNA协议,同时可访问到CICS EPI, CICS ECI, Encina, IMS, SAP R/3, HOD, MQSeries, 3270。
BEA WebLogic 不能与Encina集成,与CICS/390, IMS也是有限的集成,通过BEA eLink产品与SAP连接,但是开发人员需要自己写代码。
Websphere与WebLogic都能与TUXEDO集成,没有太多区别。
6. WebLogic 不支持OS/390
BEA计划连接到OS/390,但目前还没有实现。
7. BEA没有分析工具如Performance Pack或Site Analyzer
8. WebLogic配置和管理特点较弱
WebSphere系统管理工具优越,而使用WebLogic,管理员需要手工改配置文件,改完后还需重启应用服务器。WebLogic Admin GUI对配置文件提供的大多是只读权限。WebSphere 可和管理软件Tivoli紧密结合。
9. WebLogic价格高昂,整体投资高
BEA: 使用WebLogic Server比WebSphere高级版贵两倍多。(both with clustering).
投资总体成本上WebLogic更高,不存在完整方案的折扣,因为产品都来自不同厂家。同时多厂家也带来了高风险,若其中一家出现问题,整个方案也会有问题。(例如BEA曾经收购NCR的Top End, 但后来解除了)
IBM: 提供关于电子商务的全线产品,包括硬件、服务、软件以及网络支持。这种环境下客户可以花更多时间管理自己的业务。总体讲,从一家厂商购买全套产品相对便宜。
10. WebLogic有限的支持渠道(没有24x7服务)
BEA: 对WebLogic Server不提供24x7的支持,不支持全球化的电子商务框架。
IBM: IBM全球有一只全面的服务和支持队伍,IBM提供24x7 服务(on-site或其它)。全球许多大公司依赖IBM支持关键的商业应用。
结论
客户不应只关心运行时的产品,它需要整体方案。BEA不能提供完整框架,不能与其它系统和主机系统进行完全连接。

论坛徽章:
0
22 [报告]
发表于 2003-01-08 14:06 |只看该作者

[转帖]Weblogic VS Websphere(偏向Websphere)

WebSphere  有一大队补丁

论坛徽章:
0
23 [报告]
发表于 2003-07-18 14:57 |只看该作者

[转帖]Weblogic VS Websphere(偏向Websphere)

其实大家不要整天在这里讨论谁在上风,谁又到了下游。关键的问题是你学到了多少,中国的软件之所以不行,很大的原因就是大家只知道说,没有发力气来做。其实两个都差不多,没必要争谁是第一,这个对于我们来说没有太大的意义。
关键是你学会了其中的一样没有,精通了没有!

论坛徽章:
0
24 [报告]
发表于 2003-09-02 16:04 |只看该作者

[转帖]Weblogic VS Websphere(偏向Websphere)

Top Ten reasons to Choose BEA WebLogic over IBM WebSphere  
1. SI Market Adoption (IGS – 7%, BEA-aligned SIs – The remaining 93% of the market)
IBM global services (IGS) is the largest SI in the world (as well as the strongest proponent of WebSphere). Assuming IGS can retain all of their new PWC customers, they will have about 7% worldwide market share. IGS also now generates approx. 45% of IBM’s revenues, and has been IBM’s principal growth engine for the past several years. These facts have not been lost on Accenture, BearingPoint (formerly KPMG Consulting), EDS, Deloitte & Touche, CSC, and so on, each of whom has strategically aligned itself with BEA. So, if BEA remains only somewhat successful at containing WebSphere to the IBM professional services channel, then WebLogic will presumably continue to garner a larger share of the market.
2. Hardware Alliances (IBM vs. Sun, HP, Intel, NEC, Hitachi, Fujitsu, et. al.)
BEA competes with WebSphere on IBM hardware by selling WebLogic for mainframes (MVS and Linux), AS/400, AIX, and IBM PCs. We admittedly find it more difficult to compete with WebSphere on IBM hardware; however, many customer install bases are aligned with other Unix RISC players (Sun, HP, etc.) and Intel than they are with IBM. Intel has two strategic software stacks – MS Windows and BEA WebLogic. Intel is backing BEA because in us they see a Java vendor directly aligned with their interests (Sun and IBM make more money on SPARC or mainframe Java deployments, respectfully). BEA Java (JRockit) is now about 20% faster than IBM Java on Intel, and 40% faster than Sun HotSpot on Intel. Last quarter Dell began ripping and replacing WebSphere with WebLogic from their practice and internal use. As you know, HP is equally aligned with BEA against IBM. We have similar big partners overseas – companies like NEC, Hitachi, and Fujitsu – each of which backs WebLogic over WebSphere. And even Sun, on paper a BEA competitor, invests in their field to ensure that WebLogic wins over WebSphere on Solaris. So as long as BEA can continue to succeed at containing WebSphere to IBM hardware, we are likely to remain a majority of customer install bases.
3. Complexity (BEA – 1 WebLogic Solution, IBM – 340+ WebSphere Products)
WebSphere now has more than 340 licensable subcomponents. It is one of the most complex software products in the history of our industry. While Java-based products exist within the WebSphere brand that compete against WebLogic, the multitude of WebSphere products needed to address more sophisticated challenges causes complexity to grow exponentially as customers attempt to solve integration, security, portal, or management challenges with the WebSphere stack. Consider that for even simple integration tasks, there are separate (and often multiple) tools for business process management, Web services development & deployment, transformations, Java annotations, messaging, and adapter deployment – that is, the integration product set of WebSphere is not close to being integrated with itself! It was precisely the TCO associated with such complexity that doomed technologies like DCE, TXSeries, Component Broker, and San Francisco – and yet three of the four have found their way into WebSphere.
4. Total Cost of Ownership (BEA requires substantially fewer services than IBM)
At investor conferences, IBM touts their consulting revenues from WebSphere. IBM’s own funded research (IBM Business Partner Profitability by Reality Research & Consulting) reveals a stunning ratio of $21 for each $1 in software license revenue ($11.60 in professional services alone). We at BEA would claim those ratios are unsustainable. WebLogic at present appears to cost about 30-40% less for development than WebSphere, but our goal is to drive the cost of Web application development/customization at least down to PowerBuilder/Visual Basic levels. The market eventually wakes up to hidden costs, and rewards products based on TCO rather than discounted license fees. And yet, IBM has historically failed to deliver great ease of development and management (3rd-parties provided much of the ease-of-use for their mainframe platform).
5. Focus on Standards-Based Integration (BEA Leads in J2EE Standards, IBM Lags)
While IBM is a staunch advocate of Web Services/XML standardization, the IBM field is aggressively promoting proprietary alternatives to J2EE. Witness IBM’s focus on selling WebSphere MQ, WebSphere MQ Integrator, CrossWorlds InterChange Server, etc. As a result, IBM is the largest vendor of proprietary integration solutions that do not conform to J2EE. BEA, like Microsoft, has no legacy integration business to protect, and is therefore inclined to aggressively advance the J2EE cause.
6. Pace of J2EE Innovation (BEA – Rapid, IBM – Glacial)
It is no accident that IBM is (by a wide margin) the biggest downloader of WebLogic in the industry (1000s of downloads for each new WebLogic release). No doubt this is smart business – know thy competitor. But it also means that WebSphere remains, to some degree, a derivative of WebLogic. The innovations BEA makes today are very likely to appear in the next (or next thereafter) release of WebSphere. This is most easily demonstrable with Java standards themselves: BEA shipped the flagship of J2EE – Enterprise JavaBeans 1.0, 1.1, and 2.0 – more than 18 months ahead of IBM in each case. Rumor has it that IBM is now working on responding to BEA WebLogic Workshop and Portal development environments. No doubt IBM’s validation of our efforts has been hugely beneficial to BEA, but it has also led to claims like the one that if your goal is to get to WebSphere next year, your best bet may well be to build on WebLogic today.
7. J2EE Market Share (BEA – Obvious Market Leader, IBM – Keeping you guessing)
BEA arguably remains the market share leader, although it is safe to say that both IBM and BEA have been the big winners out of on-going consolidation in the Java infrastructure marketplace. While the WebLogic/WebSphere revenue numbers appear very close from the analysts best guesses (IBM still does not break out the numbers between WebSphere, CICS, DB2, MQSeries, etc.), WebLogic still wins decisively on production deployments: For production transactional applications, Meta Group has us at nearly 4X WebSphere’s market share. Oracle has found BEA WebLogic deployed in 9X the number of production applications that they found for WebSphere within their installed base.
8. Open Systems Software Track Record (BEA – Proven, IBM – Unproven)
IBM makes much of their track record of success in the software business. However, the large majority of that success has come when IBM owns the underlying hardware – e.g., the mainframe software portfolio (CICS, IMS, DB2, MQ Series) as well as that for the AS/400. IBM has also done reasonably well with open systems software acquisitions – Tivoli, Lotus, and MQSeries are the big winners (for PCs/Unix, MQSeries was acquired from Systems Strategies, Inc.). However, IBM’s track record for in house software for hardware platforms they don t own – such as OS/2, SAA, DCE, DB2/Unix, TX/Series, Component Broker, and San Francisco – have generally faired far less well.
9. Software Technology (BEA – Bullet Proof, IBM – Bullet Riddled)
During our last earnings call, we reported that in a total of 220 hands-on competitive engagements against WebSphere last quarter, WebLogic was the victor 210 times. Those victories came not only from our development environment, but from our clustering architecture, our session protection, our policy-based security framework, our caching/replication, our universal hot deployment, our unique liquid data innovations, and so on. Going head-to-head with WebSphere technology is something that BEA remains very comfortable with.
10. Company Size (BEA – Nimble, IBM – Feigns Nimbleness by Marketing Futures)
IBM claims that BEA is too small a company for WebLogic to beat WebSphere over time. How then would IBM explain Tuxedo’s success against TXSeries. Tuxedo currently enjoys a six-fold market share advantage over TXSeries (Standish Group). BEA won that market share going against IBM in a discipline they large invented (transaction processing), and did so as a company that was a fraction of the size we are today.
Lastly, BEA does not compete against the greater IBM. Rather BEA WebLogic competes with IBM WebSphere, just as BEA Tuxedo competed against IBM TXSeries before it – a business that in size is BEA’s peer.
By our own accounting, BEA complements north of 98% of IBM's diverse businesses:
  BEA WebLogic is deployed on IBM hardware ranging from PCs (running both Windows & Linux) to RISC Servers (AIX) to AS/400s to E390s (running OS/390 as well as Linux/390).
  BEA WebLogic works out-of-the-box with Tivoli, Eclipse, DB2, MQSeries, CICS, and IMS, including transactional integration with the last four.
  IBM Global Services (IGS) has a proven track record with successful WebLogic deployments (although WebLogic is obviously not their first choice).

论坛徽章:
0
25 [报告]
发表于 2003-09-05 20:42 |只看该作者

[转帖]Weblogic VS Websphere(偏向Websphere)

[quote]原帖由 "mukey"]其实大家不要整天在这里讨论谁在上风,谁又到了下游。关键的问题是你学到了多少,中国的软件之所以不行,很大的原因就是大家只知道说,没有发力气来做。其实两个都差不多,没必要争谁是第一,这个对于我们来说没有太..........[/quote 发表:
     
此言差矣。
知道高下,才好确定跟谁学。

论坛徽章:
0
26 [报告]
发表于 2007-08-14 15:11 |只看该作者
提示: 作者被禁止或删除 内容自动屏蔽

论坛徽章:
0
27 [报告]
发表于 2011-11-30 16:03 |只看该作者
图片看不到!。。

论坛徽章:
0
28 [报告]
发表于 2013-02-28 15:29 |只看该作者
瞎吹,was难用要死,还不稳定。为什么我见到的企业级中间件基本都是weblogic 产品啊。weblogic 用户量远远超过was,也比was更好用。从单纯部署上面说,was就麻烦的要死。此问明显在在渲染IBM。

论坛徽章:
0
29 [报告]
发表于 2013-03-04 14:39 |只看该作者

不错,顶!!!!

论坛徽章:
0
30 [报告]
发表于 2013-03-04 14:40 |只看该作者

不错,顶!!!!
您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 注册

本版积分规则 发表回复

  

北京盛拓优讯信息技术有限公司. 版权所有 京ICP备16024965号-6 北京市公安局海淀分局网监中心备案编号:11010802020122 niuxiaotong@pcpop.com 17352615567
未成年举报专区
中国互联网协会会员  联系我们:huangweiwei@itpub.net
感谢所有关心和支持过ChinaUnix的朋友们 转载本站内容请注明原作者名及出处

清除 Cookies - ChinaUnix - Archiver - WAP - TOP