Re: Deployment rather than development mode
Re: Deployment rather than development mode
- Subject: Re: Deployment rather than development mode
- From: Chuck Hill <email@hidden>
- Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 10:44:10 -0700
On Sep 29, 2005, at 3:40 AM, Mark Wardle wrote:
<snip already answered part>
Finally, does anyone know the roadmap for WebObjects (well EOF to
be precise)?
If anyone does, they are not telling. :-) Apple keeps it future
plans very secret.
What follows is my opinion / best guess. Steve Jobs doesn't tell me
either.
I'm slightly worried about where things are going as WO is now no
longer supported on anything but Mac OS X. Does that mean Mac OS X
specific features will creep in and make deployment on other
platforms impossible?
Possibly, but probably not. OS X specific features would prevent
J2EE container deployment. That would eliminate a large reason for
the move to Java. What OS X specific features might creep in, and
would you have to use them? At worst it would probably mean not
using some cool new framework.
Should I have stayed with 5.2? Then again, why was EOF originally
made in ObjC, moved to Java,
One word. Marketing. Java was seen as the dominant, standard
language / platform for web applications. Supporting two languages
was too costly. Plus Java gives you access to a wide world of third
party libraries and tools.
and then a different, but less powerful framework created for ObjC
(Core data)?
I had a good chat at WWDC with Bill Bumgarner on CoreData vs EOF. I
also attended the CoreData presentation. Those of us who know EOF
look at CoreData and think "EOF for the desktop". But we are wrong.
That is not what it is, that is not its design goal. Despite
superficial similarities, this is quite a difference beast. The
focus of CoreData is to persist application data in a way seamlessly
compatible with OO application design and to allow the nearly
transparent combindation of data from multiple sources. Well, that
is my take on the main differences anyway. Take a look at the
CoreData UUID (think that is what it is called) vs EOGlobalID to get
an idea of other differences. CoreData is not and never will be EOF
on the desktop. Personally, I think EOF on the desktop (again) is a
great idea. It might even happen, but it won't be CoreData.
It's certainly got me puzzled. Why can't I use the same frameworks
in client- and server-based applications? It would be nice to
create standalone client applications that could synchronise data
changes with a server and thus support "disconnected mode" -
there's no easy way of doing this as far as I can see.
It would be nice, but there is nothing (supported) for now.
Why has the Java bridge been deprecated - Does that mean things are
going to be increasingly difficult to support as the system
evolves? Would I be better tossing the whole lot in and going for
hibernate/cayenne?!? I'd rather not, as I've never been more
productive than with WO/EOF, but such is the problem with tracking
a proprietary platform. It would just be nice to know where we're
going to be taken!
You are using EOF in Cocoa via the Java Bridge? That seems rather
dangerous. I would want to depend on that being around for long.
Chuck
--
Coming in 2006 - an introduction to web applications using WebObjects
and Xcode http://www.global-village.net/wointro
Practical WebObjects - for developers who want to increase their
overall knowledge of WebObjects or who are trying to solve specific
problems. http://www.global-village.net/products/practical_webobjects
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden