Which IDE is more popular at professional studios, not better
Hello all,
I am trying to do some research about the two major IDE's: Netbeans and Eclipse. I have searched the forums and found countless threads on which one was better than the other (boils down to personal preference) but one thing I can't find is which one is used more at professional development studios.
I have used both and like them equally. Eclipse seems more extendable while Netbeans seems faster and easier to use. I want to dive in and get better at using them but want to invest my time in an IDE that is used professionally as well. I don't want this to turn into a flame war of "this one is better because I like it" style comments. Just from experience, which one is used more in professional environments?
Thanks guys!
Respectfully,
Kevin
So this is like a survey?
ahhh... previous company eclipse, present company netbeans
so one point for netbeans! :)
I've worked in 5 or so Java development shops, and never seen one person using NB. Eclipse, IntelliJ, and a few non-IDE programmer's editors are all I can recall having seen. (And vi of course.)
jverda at 2007-7-29 12:34:57 >
I've never seen NetBeans used in a company as well. I've seen some IntelliJ IDEA (infact I've introduced it to at least one company), but that's some time ago. In the last few years I've only seen Eclipse (but then again I've not visited _that_ many companies).
> I am trying to do some research about the two major
> IDE's: Netbeans and Eclipse. I have searched the
Wrong initial assertion to assume that those 2 are "the major IDEs".
> preference) but one thing I can't find is which one
> is used more at professional development studios.
>
That's because there isn't such data.
> I have used both and like them equally. Eclipse seems
> more extendable while Netbeans seems faster and
> easier to use. I want to dive in and get better at
Netbeans is neither, so another incorrect assertion right there.
> I like it" style comments. Just from experience,
> which one is used more in professional environments?
>
Both, yet neither...
First you will need to define your question more carefully.
"used more", but more than what?
"professional environments", define that as well.
Right here we have 6 people using IntelliJ, 2 Netbeans, and 2 Eclipse.
Previous company there were 3 people using Visual J++, and me using JBuilder, before we introduced Eclipse to replace them all for no other reason than that it was superior to Visual J++ and we couldn't get funding for JBuilder or IntelliJ from the beancounters.
So it appears that neither Eclipse nor Netbeans is "used more" let alone "used most".
On school I've done a project for Philips and they used Eclipse.
Now I'm at another company and I'm using NetBeans because I was allowed to choose it myself.
Well here we used to use Netbeans 5.5, but everyone switched to Eclipse because it is easier to do web development with it. The pack-to-war-and-deploy strategy that the latest netbeans releases use are too cumbersome for them. I believe Netbeans 6 is going to fix this though.
And I have to agree that Netbeans is slow, the IDE wants to do too much in the background. I always turn off all the so called "helping hands" such as the javadoc popup, autocompletion, etc. because it annoys me incredibly. And the startup time is a horror, especially if you have a few modules installed.
I use Eclipse most of the time, and NBs for GUIs.
mlka at 2007-7-29 12:34:57 >
I've used JBuilder, Eclipse, Netbeans. None when I had a choice!
Previously used JBuilder and intelliJ IDEA.
Where I work now the developers can choose the IDE they use, most of us use Eclipse (including me), although there is one that uses IDEA.
With the current state of Netbeans, none of us even considered using it, maybe that will change with NB 6.
dwga at 2007-7-29 12:34:57 >
> I've used JBuilder, Eclipse, Netbeans. None when I
> had a choice!
Pah! 'Real ale' developers! :-)
I find that Eclipse is most popular, but that means nothing. One place I worked, we were using Eclipse RCP for our product so didn't have much choice!
> I find that Eclipse is most popular, but that means
> nothing. One place I worked, we were using Eclipse
> RCP for our product so didn't have much choice!
You can actually develop Eclipse RCP projects using other IDEs than Eclipse, it's just more of a bother.
dwga at 2007-7-29 12:34:57 >
> > I find that Eclipse is most popular, but that
> means
> > nothing. One place I worked, we were using Eclipse
> > RCP for our product so didn't have much choice!
>
> You can actually develop Eclipse RCP projects using
> other IDEs than Eclipse, it's just more of a bother.
Yeh I know, but that's a highly suspect approach. Not only more of a bother, but removes an entire step of QA that you basically get for free by simply using the platform for development
> Yeh I know, but that's a highly suspect approach. Not
> only more of a bother, but removes an entire step of
> QA that you basically get for free by simply using
> the platform for development
I agree, was only commenting on the "no choice" comment.
Edit:
After re-reading I noticed you wrote "not much choice". So I retract my comment.
Message was edited by:
dwg
dwga at 2007-7-29 12:34:57 >
> > Yeh I know, but that's a highly suspect approach.
> Not
> > only more of a bother, but removes an entire step
> of
> > QA that you basically get for free by simply using
> > the platform for development
>
> I agree, was only commenting on the "no choice"
> comment.
>
> Edit:
> After re-reading I noticed you wrote "not much
> choice". So I retract my comment.
>
> Message was edited by:
> dwg
Ha! :-)
I'd run a mile from any job that required me to develop Eclipse plugins in another IDE. Eat your own dogfood!
> Well here we used to use Netbeans 5.5, but everyone
> switched to Eclipse because it is easier to do web
> development with it. The pack-to-war-and-deploy
> strategy that the latest netbeans releases use are
> too cumbersome for them. I believe Netbeans 6 is
> going to fix this though.
>
Such "features" are pretty much useless for real world use.
Builds have to be automated, timed, and handsoff.
If someone anywhere needs to push a button the system is broken.
And if you're working in a team environment, it's far too risky to have such a requirement anyway, as there's bound to be a discrepancy between the sources installed on that machine and the latest version stored in version control.
A build process where someone at his workstation needs his IDE goes something like this:
- person arrives late because he overslept, missing the deadline by 3 hours
- PC won't boot because of a bad shutdown the night before during the power outage
- around noon he launches his IDE, forgets to synch with CVS, and pushes the build button
- 30 minutes later someone comes in and reminds him that last night a vital update was comitted to CVS
- Screaming into his coffee cup he aborts the build, and around 1PM has synched his source tree with CVS only to find out he misses a new version of a required library
- 15 minutes later and he's found and installed it, gets a cup of coffee
- 1:30 PM, he hits the build button again
- 2:30 PM, build complete
- 2:45 PM, he uploads the build artifact to the distribution server
Now for an automated build (using say Cruisecontrol), starting the night before:
- 9PM, right on time the automated build starts
- 9:30 PM, build complete
- 9:31 PM, build artifact uploaded to the distribution server
+1 to what JWenting said. Automate as much of your process as you can possibly manage. Apart from making your life easier, it eliminates a lot of human error, saves time, and leaves developers free to concentrate on the real business of writing software
I moved from a job where it took an engineer about a week to manually do a build, to one where CruiseControl spat out builds pretty much on the hour. The culture shock made me dizzy
> The culture shock made me dizzy...
A-HA! It was you the whole time!
;o)
~
> > The culture shock made me
> dizzy...
>
> A-HA! It was you the whole time!
>
> ;o)
>
> ~
"groan" <--readers voice
:-)
