On Aug 26, 2006, at 5:24 AM, David Sanchez wrote: Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2006 04:12:12 -0400 From: David Sanchez <email@hidden> Subject: Re: Looks like ThinkSecret got some of the scoop on WO from WWDC'06 To: Dustin Withers <email@hidden> Cc: email@hidden
On Aug 25, 2006, at 11:55 PM, Dustin Withers wrote:
Hello! :)
I think I got the worse time to learn WebObjects. All the tutorials in the Apple Web Site are referring to deprecated apps like EOModeler, and most of the books out there talk about them too.
The tools are deprecated but you can still use them. The vast majority of information out there though still applies.
Of course they do. But for how long?
Does it matter? I think there are already great tools from the WO community TODAY. :-) I personally don't use WO because of the tools. And I don't judge WebObjects by how popular it is. I use it because of its clean / beautiful design. :-) Hmmm... That sounds like real love. :-D
Besides, any time Apple can just stop them to work with no prior notice. Also, it means there is no bug fixing, no support and no updated documentation.
I do not think Apple would convert iTunes Music Store and Apple website away from WebObjects. I do not know if there is any indication of it. I do not think Apple will also relay on WOLips to develop its WO solutions (iTMS+Apple Store).
From what I know Apple's in house people use Eclipse (I maybe wrong but I don't think so)
If that's the case, then the situation is worse than I thought.
Actually that would make it consistent with their strategy. Improve the frameworks, the engine, etc. And work with the WO community in enhancing the tools. Not because Eclipse is a bad environment, but because Apple is not drinking its own Kool-Aid.
But they do drink a lot of WebObjects. ;-)
But, one of the things I like is an integrated environment. If I take apart the Apple made tools (which are deprecated), old documentation (that won't be updated), a very small developing team (even though they might be geniuses, it is a lot of work for 4 people) and I need to use an open source plugin with Eclipse, forums and tutorials from third parties.... At the end, WebObject looks a lot like Cayenne/ Tapestry. You are reading too much into that rumor. The 4 people is a low peak at one time from what I understand.
And, I won't have to pay for the Tiger Server license to deploy.
You do NOT have to deploy on OS X Server. You can deploy on Linux. Or maybe on a Mac mini running regular OS X.
OS X Server is NOT required. ;-)
I mean, maybe WebObject is superior to Cayenne/Tapestry, I do not know WO that well yet, but I do not see where WO is going. The WO tools from the WO community are cross platform. Continuously enhanced. And Apple will work with them. Does that tell you where the tools are headed? :-) And according to Apple we can expect more announcements in the future. :-D
And the WO community if full of brilliant people.
Also Apple is committing more engineering resources to WO and you can read the strategy announcement if you want to know where the engine is going. And then wait for the releases to see what's improved or attend the WWDC conferences to get a closer look before the next version is released. ;-) I am not fill with pessimism, but I need a reason to believe.
There is always pessimism by many. I've been reading thoughts like this since the most successful days of WebObjects at NeXT.
I'm personally happy with the strategy announced and look forward to it.
|