Re: Is WO doomed?
Re: Is WO doomed?
- Subject: Re: Is WO doomed?
- From: email@hidden
- Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2003 22:23:13 -0600
While I was keen to hear what Todd recommended instead of WO, I am a
bit
"shocked" to see that parts of his solution seems to be early release
or
beta, work-in-progress software.
And this is different from the WO java port how?
Seaside is still changing a bit - but there are a few commercial sites
built on it.
Is it better than WO? Better how? Can I get a site up faster with
seaside than WO? You betcha. Is it easier to find and fix bugs with
seaside? Sure it is. Will Seaside scale to millions of hits a day?
Probably not without significant work. I don't much need to care
though. Do I still need to pitch in and help develop the frameworks?
Yes, but I did with WO too. You still do. There are tons of holes in
WO and I've plugged more than my share once (in ObjC). They're all back
(and a lot of new ones) and I'm tired of trying to plug or workaround
them. I've even had to write my own EOModeler because the one they
ship is too buggy to use. Now I have it and I'm teaching other
frameworks to read EOModels. (My modeler also produces javadoc style
websites with diagrams BTW).
Furthermore, the emphasis on making WO an EJB thing is a total waste of
time. EJB sucks eggs. Why use it? Heck http://www.solarmetric.com/
has a better EOF than EOF - it provides solutions to a number of
problems that the Apple team just hasn't bothered to solve - like
tunable caches (I'd like to be able to specify a class as 'volatile' or
no cache - you can do that with Kodo - where's the setting in EOF?).
Meanwhile, Apple has been sitting on their butts rewriting stuff in the
latest stupid fad languages.
Seaside/glorp, isn't as immature as you might think - the way the WO
isn't as mature as you might think (its still a relatively new port and
it shows).
Anyhow, after my last engagement, I don't ever want to use that mess
again unless some serious QA goes into it.
On Wednesday, June 25, 2003, at 06:43 PM, Ashley Aitken wrote:
Howdy All,
While I was keen to hear what Todd recommended instead of WO, I am a
bit
"shocked" to see that parts of his solution seems to be early release
or
beta, work-in-progress software.
Are you really suggesting (honest question) that this is better than WO
(with all its problems acknowledged)? Of course, I realise we are all
(Java, .Net) probably heading in the Smalltalk direction anyways ;-)
I worry more about Apple's lack of marketing, or even just recognition
that WO exists (particularly here in Australia) than their desire to
keep the product going (see ITMS etc.) and improving (wait for news
from
WWDC).
I think WO has been ahead of its time for a long time, but now, just
about now, most developers are starting to understand the concepts of
frameworks, object-relational models etc, and looking for a solution.
Of course, since Apple isn't marketing WO or even putting their hand
up,
developers are rebuilding WO (Struts, Cayenne Modeller, Cocktail), or
going with mor e commercial (but less competent) products. Apple is
missing a real opportunity!
Just my thoughts.
Cheers,
Ashley.
<email@hidden> 06/25/03 23:58 PM >>>
On Tuesday, June 24, 2003, at 12:09 PM, Alan Ward wrote:
Hey Todd, how's it going?
So what do you recommend these days?... Oracle 9iAS? ;-)
http://www.beta4.com/seaside
with
http://www.glorp.org (I taught it how to read EOModels and wrote a java
based EOModeler in Swing)
on
http://www.squeak.org
Its *way* more productive since I don't have compile edit crash cycles
and 30% of the characters in my program aren't cast operators.
_______________________________________________
webobjects-dev mailing list | email@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives:
http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/webobjects-dev
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
_______________________________________________
webobjects-dev mailing list | email@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives: http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/webobjects-dev
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.