Java IDE comparison: Borland JBuilder tops.
A comparison of 4 Java IDEs, from Borland, IBM, Oracle and Sun ranks them as follows:
- Borland JBuilder 2005 Enterprise tops with – ( 8.5 / 10 )
- IBM Rational Software Architect 6.0 – ( 8.3 / 10 )
- Oracle JDeveloper 10.1.3 – ( 8 / 10 )
- Sun Java Studio Enterprise 7 – ( 7.4 / 10 )
The article evaluates the four IDEs based on Features, Ease-of-use, Integration, Performance and Value.
Related:
>> When to buy an IDE?When to stick with Eclipse / NetBeans?
>> Eclipse vs NetBeans
>> Java IDE in a brand new avatar. Making development server centric.
>> NCStudio: Thin Client Java ILDE: 6I review
Reference:
>> Four Java IDEs duke it out
I really don’t think Eclipse and IDEA really compare to any of these. Now using Sun Java Studio Enterprise 8, I don’t think I will ever load up Eclipse again. Like most OS software, it’s extremely rich, yet extremely cumbersome to work with. I did like the C/C++ IDE, but I replaced it the minute I downloaded C++BuilderX Personal Edition.
Sun’s offering blows Eclipse away, IMHO, esp the Collaboration features.
IDEA is nice, I wish he would have compared it, but I think with as many ‘No’ lines it would get he felt it useless and a waste of space.
The probable reason for not including Eclipse and IDEA is that they both play one to two divisions higher than these (so called IDEs), and it just wouldn’t be fair 🙂
Have the developers looked at ‘thinlets’ for creating a thin UI (www.thinlets.com) ?
This should also reduce substantially the time for loading the client – currently 30 mins on a 56 K line !
— Ashutosh
[QUOTE]The article evaluates the four IDEs based on Features, Ease-of-use, Integration, Performance and Value [/QUOTE].
The article even has a [URL=http://www.infoworld.com/infoworld/img/13TCjava_ch1.gif]Java IDE comparison chart[/URL]
The author hasnt mentioned on what criterias has he compared the different IDE’s.
Not sure what constitutes being a standard-bearer if IDEA (a good, but decidedly lightweight IDE) and Eclipse (a decent platform, but an IDE requiring significant money spent on plugins & time on bludgeoning it into shape) are now standard-bearers for serious enterprise IDEs.
Not sure what constitutes ‘influential’ or ‘popular’ when neither of these tools has consistently won significant ‘editor’s choice’ or ‘developer’s choice’ type awards for enterprise Java development. (Of the IDE’s mentioned, JBuilder seems to have the most consistent wins in these categories, but I could be wrong.)
Eclipse and IDEA can only be appreciated on their own merits, not when judged by irrelevant standards. I’m glad this reviewer compared apples to apples.
I think is Idea
You’re right that he can review whatever IDE’s he wants. However, he is doing a disservice to his readers by not including the two most influential/popular IDE’s in the Java world. As a reader, why even read it? I certainly wouldn’t make a decision to buy an IDE based on a review that didn’t include Eclipse and IDEA especially when they are the standards bearers that everything is compared to.
hey, what’s wrong if the author took up four IDEs and compared them? He doesn’t say that Eclipse is bad or that IDEA is bad.
Why are Eclipse and IDEA guys so insecure that on all forums on all sites, they have to keep saying that Eclipse / IDEA is the best.
If the article writer has written something wrong, counter that. Which IDEs he chooses to try out and compare, is his prerogative.
Is the reason that these IDEs is free?
I cant not agree to any ranking that doest not even think to include ‘Eclipse’ and ‘IntelliJ IDEA’. Seems like it has been funded by the the companies that are agains Eclipse and IDEA. *cough* *cough*
[QUOTE] How can you trust an article that doesn’t even mention the most popular IDEs. Netbeans, eclipse and IDEA. [/QUOTE]
I agree!
How can you trust an article that doesn’t even mention the most popular IDEs. Netbeans, eclipse and IDEA.