• Post Reply Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic
programming forums Java Mobile Certification Databases Caching Books Engineering Micro Controllers OS Languages Paradigms IDEs Build Tools Frameworks Application Servers Open Source This Site Careers Other Pie Elite all forums
this forum made possible by our volunteer staff, including ...
Marshals:
  • Campbell Ritchie
  • Jeanne Boyarsky
  • Ron McLeod
  • Paul Clapham
  • Liutauras Vilda
Sheriffs:
  • paul wheaton
  • Rob Spoor
  • Devaka Cooray
Saloon Keepers:
  • Stephan van Hulst
  • Tim Holloway
  • Carey Brown
  • Frits Walraven
  • Tim Moores
Bartenders:
  • Mikalai Zaikin

Latest J2EE Technologies...

 
Bartender
Posts: 1155
20
Mac OS X IntelliJ IDE Oracle Spring VI Editor Tomcat Server Redhat Java Linux
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Keep seeing job adverts for the "latest" J2EE technologies. I suspect to the unaware, that it sounds more up to date than JEE...
Maybe Sun should updated the name and called it J3EE, J4EE ....
 
Java Cowboy
Posts: 16084
88
Android Scala IntelliJ IDE Spring Java
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Sun made a mess of the Java versioning scheme.

First there was Java 1.0 and 1.1. Then came Java 1.2, which was also known as "Java 2 SE" (J2SE) and then J2SE v1.3 and 1.4. And then they decided to rename it to "Java SE 5" v1.5, etc. There were supposed to be two version numbers, the marketing version number (5.0, 6.0, 7.0, 8.0) and the internal, developer version number (1.5, 1.6, 1.7, 1.8). Totally unnecessary confusion...

Likewise with Java EE, which became J2EE and later went back to Java EE.
 
Saloon Keeper
Posts: 27762
196
Android Eclipse IDE Tomcat Server Redhat Java Linux
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Unfortunately, job adverts are typically largely comprised of piles of manure. Somebody - in HR, management, or both, throws together a list of trendy buzzwords, makes up a collection of them (frequently from stale sources) and designates them as "must-haves", often with experience demands that can only be fulfilled from the Twilight Zone. They don't really know what they are asking for, but they demand it in great detail.

There is, alas, an underlying assumption of incompetence on the behalf of the applicant that if they don't already know a technology, they'll never be able to learn it, coupled with a "hit the ground running" expectation that belies the twin facts that anyone who's a "perfect match" is probably morally suspect and that most of the time getting started in a new company is spent just learning how to get around within the company - one reason why casual fire/hire is an expensive way to save money.

Incidentally, we're all expected to submit 2-page résumés, despite the fact that the first step in the application process is often submission to an automated scanner/rejecter that looks for buzzwords and therefore is most likely to pass whoever loads up the most on them. But HR apparently doesn't realize that the reverse is true as well. When I see an advert that's running off the bottom of the screen listing full of things that are mostly just basic competency, I move on to the next advert.
 
Don't get me started about those stupid light bulbs.
reply
    Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic