Re: EOF (was Re: Cocoa CGI)
Re: EOF (was Re: Cocoa CGI)
- Subject: Re: EOF (was Re: Cocoa CGI)
- From: "David W. Halliday" <email@hidden>
- Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 08:56:15 -0500
- Organization: Latin AmeriCom, formerly Latino Online
John C. Randolph wrote:
>
...
>
>
One story Apple better have at WWDC is what they're going to do about
>
EOF, and if the answer is that database apps must be written in Java,
>
then that answer is worse than no answer at all.
>
>
-jcr
>
...
Absolutely.
What Apple doesn't seam to understand is that if one must write in Java,
why would one write for an API that's only available on such a small
percentage of potential target machines? Why not write to the 100% pure
Java API's and have it all? (Yes, it may be more difficult, but the payoff
is so much greater.)
Yes, writing WebObjects in Java may make it easier for Apple to make
WebObjects portable to all those potential target machines, but even then,
I, as a developer, cannot guarantee that WebObjects will be installed on any
given target. Besides, Apple is now opening themselves up to competition in
a whole new arena (against the likes of IBM's WebSphere), without the
advantage of a native system that can transition smoothly from local apps to
web apps to enterprise apps (as is/was the case of the Objective-C based
WebObjects/EOF in conjunction with the rest of the Cocoa [nee OpenStep]
frameworks). WebObjects now becomes simply another Enterprise Java RAD
tool---one of an ever more crowded market: I'm just not sure it has enough
inherent advantage to recommend it without it's native runtime (I would
certainly take a long hard look at the other Enterprise Java RAD systems out
there before going to WebObjects now [and I'm certainly not voting for
WebObjects in this year's Java Developer's Journal survey]).
Adding Java capability was a good marketing move (Java buzzword), and
eased the transition for those that resisted the Objective-C move, but
throwing out the basis for the fundamental advantages that are inherent in
the Objective-C basis is silly, and dangerous (in my opinion).
Regardless, Apple has lost a superior tool for native Cocoa development
on the client and standalone sides, as well as squandering a reason for
using Apple hardware on the server side.
I weep...
David email@hidden