• Open Menu Close Menu
  • Apple
  • Shopping Bag
  • Apple
  • Mac
  • iPad
  • iPhone
  • Watch
  • TV
  • Music
  • Support
  • Search apple.com
  • Shopping Bag

Lists

Open Menu Close Menu
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Lists hosted on this site
  • Email the Postmaster
  • Tips for posting to public mailing lists
Re: WOBuilder Replacement
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: WOBuilder Replacement


  • Subject: Re: WOBuilder Replacement
  • From: Jeremy Rosenberg <email@hidden>
  • Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2007 23:14:08 -0700

At WWDC I was the only one who applauded the idea of a commercial WOBuilder.  And I would get my boss to buy me a copy, if it was available, I'd buy any WebObjects tool, I love this stuff.  But I spent half of today learning how to set up my WebObjects projects in Eclipse and edit the Components with WOLips and I was perfectly happy with it.  I develop in WebObjects all day everyday and I'm pretty sure my productivity is going to increase once I complete my move to Eclipse and master the idiosyncrasies of a new IDE. (And I'm coming from Intellij IDEA, which is a superior java IDE but has little in the way of WO integration)

If you use WOBuilder then you spend plenty of time in "Source" view fixing the things that Layout view screws up which means that you are already familiar with the ugly innards of a .wod and you are ecstatic to have a proper tool to work with it.  The transition should be painless and be a matter of days not weeks.

The gap between the WOLips Component editor and a full WOBuilder replacement is nowhere near the gap between Emacs and a proper IDE.  When Chuck dropped the number $150,000 to build a replacement for WOBuilder I didn't think he meant it as a jumping off point to start a collection.  I thought he was quantifying the amount of energy required to bridge that gap in a currency we can all grasp, dollars.  The gap between WOLips and WOBuilder (even one done right as Mike has described) is not large enough to justify an expenditure of  $150,000 or 3000 developer hours or however you want to look at it, hence it's a bad idea.

As far as WOBuilder's role in attracting new, part time or small time users to WebObjects, well Apple sort of sealed WO's fate when it moved it from a commercial product to the model we see now.  It's a much different product then it was when Apple was selling it in a fancy box and that means it's going to become more of a tool for power users and less of a tool for part timers.  I imagine if there was a market for the latter, Apple would have exploited it.

I apologize for not using proper <rant> markup, I don't have well formed rants.

Jeremy


On 5-Jul-07, at 9:19 PM, email@hidden wrote:

Every time I hear this argument, it brings me back to the 80's when  

some people argued that Emacs was the "end all" tool, that they were  

not slowed down by taking their hands off the keyboard to get to the  

mouse and that this graphical user stuff was just for wimps.


I use a wide variety of tools, languages and methods to do my work. I  

have to write assembler, C, Obj-C, Java, shell scripts ... Doing all  

of my work with only a single tool would be gauche and unproductive.  

Productivity for some means thinking textually and with a keyboard,  

for  others it means thinking graphically and with a mouse.


Three things should motivate a WOBuilder replacement:


1) Its absence denatures WebObjects, which was initially marketed as  

a rapid and relatively easy way to build webapps. Sure, eventually,  

you had to write more code and get down into the technology, but you  

could get simple apps with good results rather easily. It made the  

entry easier and certainly attracted new developers to join. While I  

agree wolips's component editor is good, the overall suite will not  

attract any significant numbers of new developers. Eclipse OpenSource  

connection's will not expose WebObjects to a new receptive crowd (as  

they will also stick with other opensourced solutions like Rails/ 

Hibernate/Cayenne/Tapestry or whatever). Meanwhile, the abandon of  

XCode/WoBuilder will mean the abandon of Apple's crowd who like  

simple/graphical/elegant tools. Over time, I'm convinced it spells  

the drift of WO to insignificance.


2) For full time developer, proficiency with the tool can be  

developed with time and productivity then ensues. In those scenarios,  

Eclipse might yield some positive "return on investment" to learn/ 

master it. But what about those who do not developpe WO apps full  

time ? I have to learn those tools just a few hours at a time. While  

I may intensely work on  a project for a while, I may have to switch  

to writing  assembler to boot a ARM CPU and implement a real-time app  

and then to spend weeks designing/building/testing optical/mechanical/ 

electronics systems. Next, I may have to go back and revisit a tools  

I've developed with WO to add some feature we need ! Drop back into  

eclipse, I Think not. Startup WOBuidler, makes more sense. I'll be up  

an running much faster. I doubt I'm the only one who doing this part  

time, and for us, WOBuilder is the only thing that makes sense.


3) I also develop apps in Cocoa, and the combination of XCode/ 

Interface Builder/Cocoa/Bindings just rocks! It allows to build great  

tools quickly (part-time) faster than anything else ( even from my  

Windows collegues) I do not understand why a new generation of  

WOBuilder could not do the same for WebObjects. I always expected  

that the technologies were converging to allow this, Webkit, Core  

Data, Cocoa ... It would help promote WebOjects and make it  

accessible to more developers, including novice, and part-time.


Apple should care very much about  reason 1

Developers like myself should care about 2.

Everybody should care about 3


<rant of my own>


To those who think WO will not go away because it's too significant a  

framework and because Apple uses it, think MacApp... A very  

sophisticated Application framework that died from neglect and  

eventually disappeared despite Apple using it for many of its own  

apps. A GUI editor (forgot the name) was also part of the toolchain  

and it too was eventually neglected by Apple. Faced with the  

obsolescence of the tool, a third party developed from scratch a  

better replacement and sold it (named AdLib). I do not know if it was  

profitable, but every body I knew switched to it for the few bug  

fixes and the few new features it offered. Apple eventually bought  

the application and distributed it...


Lastly, everybody is free to do what they want and I certainly agree  

the we do not have any right to expect others to do work freely for  

any of us. However I do not understand why there has to be a business  

case for developing a WOBuilder replacement ? that it must be  

absolutely profitable  ? I'm curious to see the numbers that  

supported the development of WOLips, Project Wonder ??? Should I  

assume that these were profitable endeavors ! To me, they certainly  

seem equally large/serious development efforts, probably even more  

than a WOBuilder replacement.

If WOLIps was going commercial, how much would you pay ?


It really depends on how those who would developed it want to be  

rewarded for their effort/contribution. It does not have to be free,  

neither does it have to make commercial sense.


In any scenarios, Apple should contribute.


</rant of my own>


Now, it's time to put my money  where my mouth is. I would certainly  

agree to pay for a WOBuilder replacement. I would pay a variable  

amount of money depending on the quality. $ 500 seems reasonable.


There, you have it. Now I feel better. Time to put my flame suite on...


OK, enough of that rant...



Louis Demers eng.

Obzerv Technologies Inc.





====================================================================

Jeremy Rosenberg
Systems Consultant
Academic Computing Services
Simon Fraser University
Burnaby, BC, Canada V5A 1S6

Email:  email@hidden

"AMAINT, provisioning good times since 1994!"


 _______________________________________________
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

  • Follow-Ups:
    • Re: WOBuilder Replacement
      • From: Chuck Hill <email@hidden>
    • Re: WOBuilder Replacement
      • From: Mike Schrag <email@hidden>
  • Prev by Date: Re: WOBuilder Replacement
  • Next by Date: Re: Get server host from request or url
  • Previous by thread: Re: WOBuilder Replacement
  • Next by thread: Re: WOBuilder Replacement
  • Index(es):
    • Date
    • Thread