I am in no way affiliated with JDO or Hibernate/EJB3.0 but that has to be the stupidest thing i've read in a long time.
JDO is geared toward object oriented usage. This means that you should "trust" the tool to do what it does, and thats map your OO to a schema (just like you trust ant/maven to build/deploy). I hate the word flexibility. Most people are standardised on Oracle or DB2 in industry or mysql/postgres in open source land. What flexibility do you really need? You can tweak JDO to take advantage of your database but oh, thats right, thats vendor lock in/coupling.
Hibernate is also a great tool, but is more focused on you knowing both the code and the database (hence HQL.. which is ok, but weird in the OO world).
I happen to like both for varying purposes. If you actually read more about either you would know they are both good tools with good and bad points. One allows the community to participate but controls the conceptual integreity of the tool to a few, and one is all controlled by the will of one person (who im told cannn be swayed, but just like 1 to many, many to 1 mapping, im sure thats not all true!).
I am in no way affiliated with JDO or Hibernate/EJB3.0 but that has to be the stupidest thing i've read in a long time.
JDO is geared toward object oriented usage. This means that you should "trust" the tool to do what it does, and thats map your OO to a schema (just like you trust ant/maven to build/deploy). I hate the word flexibility. Most people are standardised on Oracle or DB2 in industry or mysql/postgres in open source land. What flexibility do you really need? You can tweak JDO to take advantage of your database but oh, thats right, thats vendor lock in/coupling.
Hibernate is also a great tool, but is more focused on you knowing both the code and the database (hence HQL.. which is ok, but weird in the OO world).
I happen to like both for varying purposes. If you actually read more about either you would know they are both good tools with good and bad points. One allows the community to participate but controls the conceptual integreity of the tool to a few, and one is all controlled by the will of one person (who im told cannn be swayed, but just like 1 to many, many to 1 mapping, im sure thats not all true!).