Re: State of WebObjects
Re: State of WebObjects
- Subject: Re: State of WebObjects
- From: Miguel Arroz <email@hidden>
- Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 22:39:50 +0100
Hi!
On 2006/06/28, at 22:20, Paul Lynch wrote:
On 28 Jun 2006, at 22:08, Miguel Arroz wrote:
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...
You mean "fun", not "funny". That's a common misuse of English
that is cropping up on lists more and more recently.
Ops... I'm not a native english speaker... what's the difference?
I'm going to disagree with the initial point of this. WO and Rails
take exactly as long as each other to get started with your first
working app. The "learning curve" is more or less the same for
both technologies. Rails is most emphatically NOT simple; it is a
complex framework, exactly as it should be. The tradeoffs between
Rails and WO are there, and general opinion here gives WO the edge
still; search this list for a couple of good comparisions between
the two.
I'm not so sure. I see many web-designers creating simple rails
apps, or at least editing the interface code. I don't see them doing
this with WO. Of course, rails community tries to spread the ideia
that "Rails is so easy, even you can do it", so this will at some
point convince people that they can do apps without learning (despite
the fact that they ARE learning). But I still think you need to
understand a lot more concepts if you want to work with WO than with
rails.
Another thing that pisses me off a little (and this is not related
to the technology itself) is that the rails community also tries to
spread the idea that "Rails guys always made cool apps, and the only
cool apps out there are made with rails". Many web 2.0 apps out there
present the "Powered by Rails" logo and sometimes an informative text
right on the front page. This is just an hype that irritates me: if
I'm the user, I couldn't care less if it's done in Rails, in Java,
in .NET or in assembly. I just care if it works or not. Period. It's
OK to have this info elsewhere, for geeks like us :) to know. But it
should NOT be presented as a "feature" or a "cool factor" of the app.
It's just an hype - like Java was some years ago. Nobody really knew
what Java was, but if something had "Java", then it was cool. Oh
well. Sorry about the rant, but I could not avoid it...
Complexity and ease of understanding are important points; someone
without an OO background cannot begin to grasp the significance of
MVC, for instance.
True. WO is not for people who know very little about programming,
in my opinion. I'm not being elitist, I'm just concluding this from
my own experience with Cocoa: OS X was released when I was on my
second here of gradutation, I think (graduation takes 5 years in
Portugal). Despite the obvious problem related to OS X being
reeeeeeeealy slow and unstable in it's first versions and on my
hardware back then, I could not really understand the all the
concepts behing Cocoa, and why was it so elegant. I feel I can do it
now. It's the same for WO.
Also, I want to say that I'm still an apprentice in what relates
to WO. Some of the advantages I mentioned, for me, and still just
theoretical (I have some apps running several instances on a server,
but I do not have two servers, for instance). But I know they are
there when I eventually need them.
Also, I feel that there were only three things that I **REALLY**
liked to learn about software engineering. WO is one (and the most
recent) of them. The others are Cocoa and LISP.
Yours
Miguel Arroz
"GUERRA E' PAZ
LIBERDADE E' ESCRAVIDAO
IGNORANCIA E' FORCA" -- 1984
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