Re: State of WebObjects
Re: State of WebObjects
- Subject: Re: State of WebObjects
- From: Miguel Arroz <email@hidden>
- Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 22:08:12 +0100
Hi!
On 2006/06/28, at 21:31, David LeBer wrote:
2. Shrinking list of development options
What do you mean?
4. Some are concerned about Apples commitment to the platform. (I
have to say I am not one of them.)
Apple will present some conferences about WO in WWDC, specially
one about Web 2.0 and WebObjects. So, no, the end is still far away.
Also, Apple bases one of it's most important businesses (iTunes Music
Store) on WO (besides Apple Store itself). So, they will keep WO for
a while.
Rails is an interesting contender, and I'm glad to see a new well
designed framework on the field. But it is still very young and has
a long way to go before it equals the richness of WO.
1 month = 30 * day... rails has some funny stuff, but lacks the
"serious" stuff... I tend to dislike the "oh look, it's sooooo easy"
frameworks that are growing like mushrooms out there. Considering
that a month is 30 days is not simplification... it's ridiculous!
This way I also can write many frameworks! :) My point is, rails is
simple, rails allows you (and specially, people who know almost zero
about programming) to make something work in 30 minutes. But when
things start to become more complex, rails will not support you like
a serious framework like WO does. WO is like Cocoa, it requires to to
learn a bunch of stuff before staring. After staring, you have to
learn even more. But then you start evolving and creating some really
clever solutions to your complex problems in as easy, straightforward
and, most important, ELEGANT way, that other frameworks simply cannot
achieve.
And I'm not even talking about stuff that WO gives you for free
that are complicated or non-existing on other solutions, like data
caching, transparent transactions (actually I prefer to think on them
as "sand-boxes"), clustering support (many app instances on one
server, and many servers), etc. Specially clustering, it's cool to
"just add" another server when you need more horse power. Other
frameworks claim they can do it. WO does it. It's really just "buy
server, install server, install app, say to web server the app is
also running there, there's no next step".
Yours
Miguel Arroz
"The world lies in the hands of evil
And we pray it would last" -- Apocalyptica, Life Burns!
Miguel Arroz
http://www.ipragma.com
_______________________________________________
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