5.2. Enterprise Integration
In some ways, C redefined enterprise integration, by allowing strong database
connectivity across an open API (ODBC for Microsoft applications) and providing
transaction monitors like Tuxedo and Encina. C was disruptiveit introduced
enterprise programming beyond mainframes. Java continued this legacy with
frameworks for transactions, rich database integration, messaging, and many other
forms of plumbing code called middleware.
I don't think the next major applications language will initially have to have th
e full
enterprise capabilities of C or Java to succeed. Visual Basic certainly achieved
tremendous success without these capabilities by leveraging the services provided
by other frameworks written in lower-level languages like C. We've already
determined that the next language should interoperate with other Java programs,
hopefully within the same virtual machine. It should also interoperate through a
coarse-grained service layer. That said, some enterprise capabilities will be very
important.
5.2.1. Database Integration
Minimally, a new language should access relational databases in a natural,
productive way. I don't think any particular application style is importantyou can
see wildly successful environments with different strategies:
 Microsoft builds a framework that leverages the power of SQL , row sets,
and relational databases. The center of the Microsoft universe, from a data
perspective, is the relational database. The strategy can scale very well and
is surprisingly productive.
 Java, instead, seems to be moving toward ORM. The center of Java's data
universe is an object-oriented, persistent model. Other Java applications
leverage JDBC with helper frameworks quite successfully.

Rule Description
Database access
API
Provide a clean, productive API for database access.
Relational
databases
Focus on relational databases first.
Database
performance
Database interactions should be very fast.
Transactions Enable application transaction demarcation.
Language security Provide a clean foundation for language security.
Application
security
Let developers secure their applications.
Security integration

Let developers integrate enterprise security, especially for
Internet applications.

Like the Java features, having these basic enterprise features does not guarantee
success. They just let you play the game.

5.3. Generating the Buzz
Many languages have trumped Java technically, but they still failed. Betamax, too,
was technically better than VHS. The biggest factor of the equation is social.
Without a credible community, there can be no success. To a programmer, a

within the programming community. Java's been successful for enterprise
developers, but hard-core hackers in the Perl and Python communities frown on
Java. And Microsoft developers form cultures all their own, with subcultures in it
that favor C++ or Visual Basic.
That means the winning formula will also change. At one point, a dominant
personality like Steve Jobs may make the difference, and the next, like with the
star-crossed NextStep platform, it's not enough. This is all to say that generating
buzz is more art than science, and maybe more luck than art. Still, certain themes
and trends ring true.
5.3.1. Open Source
Unless it's a disruptive technology, it's hard to imagine the next major
programming language coming from a larger commercial vendor. There's just too
much fear and distrust a
mong the major players: Microsoft, IBM, and Sun. Instead,
I think a credible alternative is much more likely to emerge from the open source
community. The open source model provides a stage for thousands of projects,
where they can succeed or fail based on their merits. Projects need to prove
effective technologies and marketing amid a cynical, critical audience to succeed.
There are several interesting test cases in the open source community now: Perl,
PHP, Python, Ruby, and many others. You see far fewer commercial languages
with any degree of momentum. The biggest, C#, is effectively a Java clone.
Open source software has something else going for it. Since open source projects
usually have no formal support, the community must support the language. This
environment tests the community dynamics for a language as well as the
technology. Communities take on a personality, like snobbish, edgy, nurturing, or
bickering. Larger languages like Java may have subcommunities with personalities
all their own. When a language gets sudden attention, the personality of the
community will either attract or repel new users. Fine-
tuning community dynamics
is a difficult proposition, because this personality may be hard to judge from the

immediately. C was approachable because it let hard-core systems programmers
solve low-level problems in a high-level language, with much better performance
and flexibility than other high-
level languages. C++ was approachable because you
could write C without mo
difications, and upgrade to C++ features as you wanted to
include them in your programs. Java was approachable because it had a familiar
syntax, a friendlier memory model, and a clear, consistent path to Internet
solutions. Smalltalk was not approachable, because vendors charged too muchit
was too expensive to play.
Though nothing simple has a C++-like syntax, I still think that many languages are
approachable because of their friendly, productive syntax with a familiar object
model. Python versus Ruby is a good example of differences in approachability.
Ruby has one of the most highly productive web environments, and a community
and philosophy focused on getting programmers off of the ground quickly and
painlessly. You can install components easily, often w
ith two or three words, using
a feature called Gems that does the work for you, provided you have an Internet
connection. Python, on the other hand, has a simple language and syntax, but the
web libraries are nowhere near as approachable. When you start to learn one of
them, you don't find the ready tutorials or community reaching out to help you.
The Ruby on Rails people understand how to make Rails approachable.
5.3.4. The Killer App
Without some kind of catalyst, it's difficult to imagine how a successful
community ever gets started. Applets let Java spread to many desktops quickly.
Developers could embed dynamic content into their web pages in a matter of
hours.
On the surface, it seems like a language must have a vibrant community to ever get
rich enough to succeed on any scale, but the community usually won't come until
the language is rich enough. A killer app to a developer is a solution that is so

it's time to determine the next major language.
Table 5-3. Community-centric roles
Rule Description
Open
source
Have a rich open source community.
Productivity

Be much more productive than Java for the simplest commercial
applications.
Catalyst
Have a tremendously popular application or framework that
transcends programming languages.
Familiarity Be easy for Java developers to learn.
Simplicity Make it easy to solve simple problems.